ReviewClocks & sleep2026
Circadian Regulation and Pain: A Systematic Review of the Association Between Rest-Activity Rhythm and Pain-Related Outcomes.
Review in Clocks & sleep, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The rest-activity rhythm (RAR) is a key marker of circadian regulation and is commonly assessed using actigraphy. Emerging evidence suggests that characteristics of RAR, such as amplitude, stability, and regularity, may be associated with pain-related outcomes. However, no systematic review has yet synthesized this evidence across populations and pain conditions. This systematic review aimed to provide an overview of current approaches to measuring and defining RAR and to examine its associations with pain outcomes in both healthy individuals and clinical populations experiencing acute or chronic pain. A systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase was conducted, with the final search completed on 20 May 2025. Observational studies reporting associations between at least one RAR characteristic and a pain outcome were eligible. Article selection and risk-of-bias assessment using the ROBINS-E tool were performed independently by two reviewers, and findings were synthesized narratively. Seven cross-sectional studies were included, employing diverse analytic methods such as cosinor and non-parametric analyses. Overall, the findings were heterogeneous, suggesting that associations between RAR and pain vary according to the RAR metric used, the analytical approach, and the population studied. Nevertheless, the evidence generally indicates that more robust and well-consolidated circadian rhythms are associated with lower pain, whereas regularity and timing appear to play more context-dependent roles, highlighting the potential relevance of RAR metrics as modifiable targets and the need for standardized measurement approaches.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.