CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 208Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationPain Management and Opioid UsePain Mechanisms and Treatments

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 206 of the 206 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Assessment of physical function and participation in chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT/OMERACT recommendations

Open access
Taylor, Ann M., Phillips, Kristine, Patel, Kushang V., Turk, Dennis C., Dworkin, Robert H., Beaton, Dorcas, Clauw, Daniel J., Gignac, Monique A.M., Markman, John D., Williams, David A., Bujanover, Shay, Burke, Laurie B., Carr, Daniel B., Choy, Ernest H., Conaghan, Philip G., Cowan, Penney, Farrar, John T., Freeman, Roy, Gewandter, Jennifer, Gilron, Ian, Goli, Veeraindar, Gover, Tony D., Haddox, J. David, Kerns, Robert D., Kopecky, Ernest A., Lee, David A., Malamut, Richard, Mease, Philip, Rappaport, Bob A., Simon, Lee S., Singh, Jasvinder A., Smith, Shannon M., Strand, Vibeke, Tugwell, Peter, Vanhove, Gertrude F., Veasley, Christin, Walco, Gary A., Wasan, Ajay D., Witter, James·2016·Pain
DOI 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000577PMC PMC7453823
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Although pain reduction is commonly the primary outcome in chronic pain clinical trials, physical functioning is also important. A challenge in designing chronic pain trials to determine efficacy and effectiveness of therapies is obtaining appropriate information about the impact of an intervention on physical function. The Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) and Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) convened a meeting to consider assessment of physical functioning and participation in research on chronic pain. The primary purpose of this article is to synthesize evidence on the scope of physical functioning to inform work on refining physical function outcome measurement. We address issues in assessing this broad construct and provide examples of frequently used measures of relevant concepts. Investigators can assess physical functioning using patient-reported outcome (PRO), performance-based, and objective measures of activity. This article aims to provide support for the use of these measures, covering broad aspects of functioning, including work participation, social participation, and caregiver burden, which researchers should consider when designing chronic pain clinical trials. Investigators should consider the inclusion of both PROs and performance-based measures as they provide different but also important complementary information. The development and use of reliable and valid PROs and performance-based measures of physical functioning may expedite development of treatments, and standardization of these measures has the potential to facilitate comparison across studies. We provide recommendations regarding important domains to stimulate research to develop tools that are more robust, address consistency and standardization, and engage patients early in tool development.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000577

Cites

206 of 206 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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

Items 201–206 of 206

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Foster, 2003, Understanding the process of care for musculoskeletal conditions—why a biomedical approach is inadequate, Rheumatology (Oxford), 42, 401
  2. 2009, Guidance for industry on patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims, Fed Regist, 74, 65132

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 208

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Taylor, A. M., Phillips, K., Patel, K. V., Turk, D. C., Dworkin, R. H., Beaton, D., Clauw, D. J., Gignac, M. A. M., Markman, J. D., Williams, D. A., Bujanover, S., Burke, L. B., Carr, D. B., Choy, E. H., Conaghan, P. G., Cowan, P., Farrar, J. T., Freeman, R., Gewandter, J., Gilron, I., Goli, V., Gover, T. D., Haddox, J. D., Kerns, R. D., Kopecky, E. A., Lee, D. A., Malamut, R., Mease, P., Rappaport, B. A., Simon, L. S., Singh, J. A., Smith, S. M., Strand, V., Tugwell, P., Vanhove, G. F., Veasley, C., Walco, G. A., Wasan, A. D., & Witter, J.
Affiliations
  • Cardiff University (GB)
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • University of Rochester Medicine (US)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • Depomed (United States) (US)
  • University of Maryland, Baltimore (US)
  • Tufts University (US)
  • University of Leeds (GB)
  • American Chronic Pain Association (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Queen's University (CA)
  • Pfizer (United States) (US)
  • United States Army Medical Research and Development Command (US)
  • Purdue Pharma (United States) (US)
  • Yale University (US)
  • Collegium Pharmaceutical (United States) (US)
  • Ford Motor Company (United States) (US)
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
  • University of Ottawa (CA)
  • Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Palo Alto, CA, USA
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
ORCID
Venue
Pain
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2016-04-07
Volume
157
Issue
9
Pages
1836-1850
ISSN
  • 0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
  • 1872-6623
DOI
10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000577
PMC
PMC7453823
OpenAlex
W2338379519
Cited by
208
References
205
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 3
FWCI
2.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Food and Drug Administration (U01-FD005936)
  • National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (K23AR060241, L30 AR065256, R01AR059102)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology (medical) › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
Keywords
chronic pain, physical function, participation, patient-reported outcomes, performance-based measures, work participation, social participation (health and rehabilitation), caregiver burden, outcome measurement, clinical trial design, IMMPACT, OMERACT, standardization of outcome measures
MeSH terms
Clinical Trials as Topic, Humans, Pain Measurement, Quality of Life, Treatment Outcome, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Social Participation, Chronic Pain, Pain Management

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