Cited by 210Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome ResearchMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationMobile Health and mHealth Applications

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 77 of the 80 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 42 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Internet-enhanced management of fibromyalgia: A randomized controlled trial

Open access

Abstract

Both pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions have demonstrated efficacy in the management of fibromyalgia (FM). Non-pharmacological interventions however are far less likely to be used in clinical settings, in part due to limited access. This manuscript presents the findings of a randomized controlled trail of an Internet-based exercise and behavioral self-management program for FM designed for use in the context of a routine clinical care. 118 individuals with FM were randomly assigned to either (a) standard care or (b) standard care plus access to a Web-Enhanced Behavioral Self-Management program (WEB-SM) grounded in cognitive and behavioral pain management principles. Individuals were assessed at baseline and again at 6 months for primary endpoints: reduction of pain and an improvement in physical functioning. Secondary outcomes included fatigue, sleep, anxiety and depressive symptoms, and a patient global impression of improvement. Individuals assigned to the WEB-SM condition reported significantly greater improvement in pain, physical functioning, and overall global improvement. Exercise and relaxation techniques were the most commonly used skills throughout the 6 month period. A no-contact, Internet-based, self-management intervention demonstrated efficacy on key outcomes for FM. While not everyone is expected to benefit from this approach, this study demonstrated that non-pharmacological interventions can be efficiently integrated into routine clinical practice with positive outcomes.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

In a 6-month intent-to-treat randomized controlled trial, adding a no-contact Internet behavioral self-management program to standard care significantly improved pain and physical functioning in adults with fibromyalgia compared with standard care alone. Secondary sleep, fatigue, and mood outcomes did not differ, but patient global impression of change favored the web-enhanced group.

Key findings

  • Among 118 randomized participants (59 per arm), WEB-SM improved average pain versus standard care (F(1,115)=5.67, p<.01); 30% pain responders were 29% in WEB-SM vs 8% in standard care (p<.008), with NNT=5.
  • Physical functional status improved in WEB-SM versus standard care (F(1,115)=5.08, p<.03); 0.50 SD responders were 31% vs 6% (p<.002), with NNT=5.
  • Sleep, fatigue, depression, and anxiety did not show significant group differences. PGIC improvement was reported by 57% of WEB-SM participants vs 21% of standard care participants (n=35 vs n=33; p<.003).
  • Adherence: 89%–94% of WEB-SM participants used at least one module monthly, averaging 4 skills at a time; functional responders used exercise, pleasant activity, and problem solving more than non-responders (p<.03, p<.02, p<.03), while no clear skill pattern was tied to pain response.

Methods

  • Six-month RCT at Avera Research Institute in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, in a mostly rural five-state catchment; 118 adults meeting ACR fibromyalgia criteria were randomized 1:1 to standard care or standard care plus WEB-SM, a 13-module website with no additional coaching or professional contact.
  • Primary outcomes were SF-36 Physical Functioning and Brief Pain Inventory Severity; secondary outcomes included Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory, MOS Sleep Scale, CES-D, STPI anxiety, and PGIC.
  • Intent-to-treat analysis used baseline observation carried forward for missing endpoint values; baseline-adjusted ANCOVA tested group differences, with Fisher’s exact tests for responder, adherence, manipulation-check, and satisfaction comparisons. Sample was 95% female, mean age 50 years (SD=11.5), 97% Caucasian, 79% married, mean FM duration 9.4 years (SD=6.5), mean BMI 28.7 (SD=5.3); attrition was 10.2%.

Limitations

  • The authors state that the standard care control limits attribution of outcomes exclusively to module content rather than nonspecific factors such as increased Internet use or self-focus; they also note no passive web engagement tracking, no power for secondary outcomes, and that PGIC was added mid-trial and available for only about half the sample.
  • The authors state that a no-contact intervention may not be sufficiently intense or structured for all patients with fibromyalgia, and that fatigue, sleep, and mood were not impacted, possibly requiring more specialized content.
  • Evident from the text: the sample was predominantly female, Caucasian, married, and recruited through a rural telemedicine network, which may limit generalizability; outcomes were self-reported, and 10.2% attrition was handled with baseline observation carried forward.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.pain.2010.08.034

Cites

77 of 77 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

5 tests recomputed · 0 with the reported and recomputed p on opposite sides of .05

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 42 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 48 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 14
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 22
32 of 32
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Integration of non-pharmacological interventions into routine clinical care for fibromyalgia has been slow.

    “yet the integration of non-pharmacological interventions into routine clinical care has been slow.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Barriers to integrating non-pharmacological interventions into routine fibromyalgia care include lack of physician knowledge or time, limited access to qualified therapists, insufficient third-party coverage, and patient travel burden.

    “Potential barriers to integration include: lack of physician knowledge or time to implement non-pharmacological approaches, limited access to qualified therapists, insufficient third party coverage of non-pharmacological approaches, and patient burden associated with traveling to and from therapy.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Most patients with fibromyalgia do not receive evidence-based non-pharmacological components of care.

    “Thus, most patients with FM do not receive these evidence-based components of care.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    To date, no web-based interventions have been studied addressing fibromyalgia.

    “but to date, no web-based interventions have been studied addressing the complicated issues associated with FM.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    CBT works best when developed to target a specific type of change.

    “However, while being theoretically grounded in common principles of behavioral and cognitive change, CBT works best when developed to target a specific type of change.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The efficacy of the cognitive and behavioral skills was not in question.

    “As the efficacy of the cognitive and behavioral skills were not in question, and we were not challenging the potential superiority of face-to-face modalities when available, it was our intent to evaluate the WEB-SM program in the clinical context in which it would be most likely applied.”
6 of 6

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?

Statistics that don’t add up

Each reported p-value recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom.

  • p-value fits an unstated one-tailed test: t(33)=2.26, p < .03

    Minor

    The paper reports p < .03 here; recomputing from the test statistic and its degrees of freedom gives p = .031 (two-tailed). The reported value is what a one-tailed test gives, but the paper does not say near this result that a one-tailed test was used.

    Reported p < .03 · recomputed p = .031

  • p-value fits an unstated one-tailed test: t(48)=2.19, p < .03

    Minor

    The paper reports p < .03 here; recomputing from the test statistic and its degrees of freedom gives p = .033 (two-tailed). The reported value is what a one-tailed test gives, but the paper does not say near this result that a one-tailed test was used.

    Reported p < .03 · recomputed p = .033

  • p-value fits an unstated one-tailed test: F(1,115)=5.67, p < .01

    Minor

    The paper reports p < .01 here; recomputing from the test statistic and its degrees of freedom gives p = .019. The reported value is what a one-tailed test gives, but the paper does not say near this result that a one-tailed test was used.

    Reported p < .01 · recomputed p = .019

  • p-value fits an unstated one-tailed test: t(45)=2.27, p < .02

    Minor

    The paper reports p < .02 here; recomputing from the test statistic and its degrees of freedom gives p = .028 (two-tailed). The reported value is what a one-tailed test gives, but the paper does not say near this result that a one-tailed test was used.

    Reported p < .02 · recomputed p = .028

4 of 4

Statistics recomputed

Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.

  • Doesn’t add upF(1, 115) = 5.67reported p < .01 · recomputed p = .019

    “F(1,115)=5.67, p < .01”

  • Doesn’t add upt(48) = 2.19reported p < .03 · recomputed p = .033

    “t(48)=2.19, p < .03”

  • Doesn’t add upt(45) = 2.27reported p < .02 · recomputed p = .028

    “t(45)=2.27, p < .02”

  • Doesn’t add upt(33) = 2.26reported p < .03 · recomputed p = .031

    “t(33)=2.26, p < .03”

  • ConsistentF(1, 115) = 5.08reported p < .03 · recomputed p = .026

    “F(1,115)=5.08, p < .03”

5 of 5

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Pain-test p-value does not match its F statistic

    Minor

    For an F statistic of 5.67 with 1 and 115 degrees of freedom, the p-value is approximately 0.019, not less than 0.01.

1 of 1

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 80 references

3 of the 80 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 209

Metadata

Authors
Williams, D. A., Kuper, D., Segar, M., Mohan, N., Sheth, M., & Clauw, D. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • Avera McKennan Hospital & University Health Center (US)
  • University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
Williams, David A.
Venue
Pain
Published
2010-12
Volume
151
Issue
3
Pages
694-702
ISSN
0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1971050325
Cited by
210
References
80
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 13
FWCI
7.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • NIAMS/NIH (R01-AR050044)
  • DAMD (17-00-2-0018)
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 › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
Keywords
fibromyalgia, online intervention, self-management program, physical activity, relaxation techniques, cognitive-behavioral pain management, non-pharmacological treatment, analgesia, physical function, fatigue, sleep, anxiety, depressive symptoms, routine clinical practice
MeSH terms
Behavior Therapy, Exercise Therapy, Fibromyalgia, Humans, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self Care, Severity of Illness Index, Treatment Outcome, Telemedicine, Internet

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-09, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-09 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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