CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 81Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome ResearchMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationMyofascial pain diagnosis and treatment

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

An analytical review of 24 controlled clinical trials for fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS)

White, Kevin P., Harth, Manfred·1996·Pain
DOI 10.1016/0304-3959(95)00213-8
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

We performed a combined manual and computer search of the FMS literature to identify controlled clinical trials in FMS from 1980 to June 1994 inclusive. Our specific objectives were: 1) to determine which outcome measures have been used in clinical trials for FMS, and the methods utilized to measure these outcomes; 2) to identify which outcome measures were most and least sensitive in distinguishing between treatment groups, and 3) to identify weakness in trial design. Our analysis of 24 clinical trials demonstrates the large diversity of outcome measures and measurement instruments that have been used to detect differences between treatment and placebo in the management of FMS. Whereas certain outcomes, such as self-reported pain and sleep quality, were frequently measured, other clinically important outcomes, such as functional and psychological status, were infrequently included in data collection. Finally, we identified several significant potential sources of bias, including potential flaws in subject selection and group allocation, inadequate randomization, incomplete blinding, errors in outcome measurement, and inappropriate analysis of data.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0304-3959(95)00213-8

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Huskisson, 1976, Assessment for clinical trials, Clin Rheum Dis, 2, 37
  2. 1994, Medline 1966–1981, 1982–1988, 1989–1993
  3. 1986, 81, 1
  4. 1989, 16, 58
  5. 1989, 16, 1

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 81

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
White, K. P., & Harth, M.
Affiliations
Western University (CA)
Corresponding author
White, Kevin P.
ORCID
White, Kevin P.
Venue
Pain
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
1996-02
Volume
64
Issue
2
Pages
211-219
ISSN
0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/0304-3959(95)00213-8
OpenAlex
W1991556052
Cited by
81
References
24
Citations by year
2020: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 4 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Myofascial pain diagnosis and treatment
Keywords
fibromyalgia, outcome measures, clinical trial design, treatment efficacy, self-reported pain, sleep quality, functional status, psychological state, bias in clinical trials, randomization, blinding, measurement instruments
MeSH terms
Clinical Trials as Topic, Female, Fibromyalgia, Humans, Research Design, Treatment Outcome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review