ArticleBMC psychology2026
Self-reported acceptable pain intensity is associated with psychosocial burden beyond pain severity in chronic pain patients: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC psychology, 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
backgroundSelf-reported acceptable pain intensity is collected as part of intake procedures in some pain clinic settings, yet has rarely been examined in relation to psychosocial outcomes. This study investigated whether acceptable pain intensity is associated with psychosocial symptom burden (somatization, anxiety, sleep impairment, perceived stress, depression, and pain-related disability) in chronic pain patients after adjusting for pain severity and trauma history.
methodsSecondary analysis of 822 chronic pain patients from a German university pain clinic (previously published cohort). Acceptable pain (visual analogue scale [VAS], 0-100) was examined in relation to somatization (PHQ-15), anxiety (GAD-7), sleep impairment (VAS), perceived stress (PHQ-Stress), depression (PHQ-9), and disability (Pain Disability Index) in multivariable regression models adjusted for three pain intensity measures, trauma category, age, and sex. Acceptable pain was scaled per 10-point VAS increment. Bonferroni correction was applied (α = 0.008). Post-hoc trauma × acceptable pain interactions were tested.
resultsHigher acceptable pain was associated with greater somatization (B = 0.37, 95% CI 0.19-0.55, p < .001), anxiety (B = 0.30, 0.11-0.48, p = .002), sleep impairment (B = 1.75, 0.67-2.84, p = .002), and perceived stress (B = 0.23, 0.09-0.37, p = .002), but not with depression (p = .054) or disability (p = .82). Findings were consistent across three prespecified sensitivity analyses. An exploratory post-hoc interaction test suggested that the acceptable pain-depression association was more pronounced in higher trauma categories (Bonferroni-significant trauma × acceptable pain interaction, p < .001).
conclusionsHigher self-reported acceptable pain intensity is associated with elevated psychosocial symptom burden beyond pain severity, with significant adjusted associations for somatization, anxiety, sleep impairment, and perceived stress, but not for depression or disability. Although the incremental contribution was small, the direction of the association was consistent across the four significant outcomes. Higher acceptable pain should therefore not be interpreted as evidence of better coping. Instead, it may reflect heterogeneous processes such as low outcome expectations, resigned tolerability, or psychosocial vulnerability, particularly among patients in higher trauma categories; shared method variance cannot be excluded. Prospective validation is needed.
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.