ArticlePain research & management2026
Early and Multidisciplinary Management of Chronic Noncancer Pain and Conceptualization of Central Sensitization in Spain: Delphi CADOR Study.
Article in Pain research & management, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Early and Multidisciplinary Management of Chronic Noncancer Pain and Conceptualization of Central Sensitization in Spain: Delphi CADOR Study.Pain research & management · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe CADOR study aimed to obtain consensus on the diagnosis, management, and follow-up of patients with chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) in Spain, including beliefs about central sensitization (CS), and addressing multidisciplinary care and referral processes.
methodsA Delphi consensus of two successive rounds (July 2023-November 2023) among 100 panelists working in Primary Care (PC), Traumatology, Rehabilitation, and Pain Units (Anesthesiology) was performed. Consensus was defined as ≥ 70% of panelists agreeing or disagreeing with a statement. The questionnaire included 30 questions with some Likert-type scale items systematized as follows: 1 to 3 (disagreement), 4 to 6 (neutral), and 7 to 9 (agreement). A scientific committee (SC) of five experts in the field validated the questionnaire and its results.
resultsPanelists considered pain as an entity and underlined the need to include it in medical records. CNCP should be addressed holistically and managed by a multidisciplinary team. Experts agreed to specifically investigate the presence of pain in patients with mood disorders and among the elderly. Moreover, the panelists considered it important to highlight the role of CS in CNCP evolution, a concept not well established in real clinical practice. Panelists emphasized the need to enhance knowledge to prevent the chronification of pain, address symptoms potentially associated with CS, and to improve patients' prognosis. Finally, panelists highlighted the need for ongoing training initiatives for clinicians and patients, promoting awareness, with a particular focus on the patients' needs.
conclusionThis study underscores the importance of early detection, personalized treatment, and structured follow-up for the correct therapeutic approach of CNCP in the Spanish setting. These recommendations may also help to anticipate symptoms potentially associated with CS by improving conceptual understanding in CNCP patients. Finally, respondents also highlighted the relevance of multidisciplinary care and referral processes in patients with CNCP.
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.