Observational studyFrontiers in public health2026
Development and validation of a predictive model for chronic pain after thoracoscopic pulmonary resection.
Observational study in Frontiers in public health, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) is a major complication following video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) for lung resection. Despite its clinical importance, the reported incidence of CPSP varies considerably across studies, and a standardized tool for risk prediction remains lacking. This study aimed to identify predictors associated with CPSP after VATS lung resection within a single-center prospective observational cohort and to develop predictive models to guide personalized analgesic strategies. Methods: Clinical data were analyzed from patients who underwent thoracoscopic pulmonary resection at Tangdu Hospital between August 2024 and July 2025. Eligible patients were randomly allocated into a training cohort (80%) for model development and an internal validation cohort (20%) for model validation. Acute pain was assessed using the highest Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) score recorded within 72 h postoperatively, while CPSP was evaluated at 3 months after surgery. Patients were dichotomized based on the presence of CPSP into the CPSP group and the non-CPSP group. Variables with a Results: A total of 744 patients were included in this study, with 595 assigned to the training set and 149 to the validation set. Among all patients, 284 (38.1%) developed CPSP. The incidence rates in the training and validation cohorts were 37.8 and 36.9%, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression identified gender, postoperative acute pain, postoperative pneumonia, duration of chest tube drainage, and opioid rescue dose (in morphine milligram equivalents) as independent predictors associated with CPSP. The nomogram model constructed based on these predictors demonstrated good performance, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.880 (95% CI: 0.850-0.910). Calibration curve analysis confirmed the high predictive accuracy of the model (Hosmer-Lemeshow test, Conclusions: CPSP remains highly prevalent after thoracoscopic pulmonary resection.
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.