ReviewNeurology and therapy2026
Beyond Pain Intensity: A Patient-Informed Framework for Documenting Burden in Small Fiber Neuropathy.
Review in Neurology and therapy, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Small fiber neuropathy (SFN) is a sensory-autonomic neuropathy of thinly myelinated Aδ and unmyelinated C fibers that can produce neuropathic pain and multisystem autonomic symptoms. Although diagnostic criteria and confirmatory testing have improved recognition, SFN burden may remain underrecognized even after diagnosis. This narrative review identifies two complementary documentation failures. The translation problem arises when symptom labels and intensity ratings do not capture effects on sustainable function, cognitive workload, emotional well-being, and participation. The fragmentation problem arises when specialties assess multisystem symptoms without preserving their temporal pattern, co-occurrence, shared triggers, treatment trade-offs, and recovery costs. Reverse availability bias is proposed as a conceptual mechanism that may intensify both failures: symptoms or mechanisms not represented in clinicians' mental models may be overlooked in consideration and documentation. The review proposes an SFN Burden Integration Framework (SFN-BIF) that separates symptom presence, burden, and causal attribution and combines validated measures with six core documentation fields: temporal pattern, triggers and relievers, co-occurrence, recovery cost, functional consequences, and cognitive-emotional consequences. Longitudinal patient-reported information is integrated with neurological examination, skin biopsy, quantitative sensory testing, autonomic or organ-specific testing, and cognitive or functional assessment when indicated. Better integration may inform diagnosis and referral, treatment selection and trade-offs, rehabilitation and psychological care, disability assessment, phenotyping, and clinical trial outcome selection while preserving diagnostic rigor. The framework remains conceptual and requires prospective evaluation of validity, feasibility, clinical utility, and administrative burden.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42870195What 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.