Cited by 707Opioid Use Disorder TreatmentPain Management and Opioid UseAnesthesia and Pain Management

Guideline for opioid therapy and chronic noncancer pain

Open access
Busse, Jason W., Craigie, Samantha, Juurlink, David N., Buckley, D. Norman, Wang, Li, Couban, Rachel J., Agoritsas, Thomas, Akl, Elie A. +12 more·2017·Canadian Medical Association Journal

Abstract

Chronic noncancer pain includes any painful condition that persists for at least three months and is not associated with malignant disease.[1][1] According to seven national surveys conducted between 1994 and 2008, 15%–19% of Canadian adults live with chronic noncancer pain.[2][2] Chronic

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1503/cmaj.170363

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • At the time of TPS referral, patients in the ACT group were taking high doses of opioid medication-well above the 90 mg MED maximum upper limit recommended by the 2017 Canadian guideline for opioids for chronic non-cancer pain.

    “At the time of TPS referral, patients in the ACT group were taking high doses of opioid medication—well above the 90 mg MED maximum upper limit recommended by the 2017 Canadian guideline for opioids for chronic non-cancer pain.45”

    From Acceptance and Commitment Therapy to manage pain and opioid use after major surgery: Preliminary outcomes from the Toronto General Hospital Transitional Pain Service (2017) · cites this paper as [45]

    Recommendation 6 recommends prescribing less than 90 mg morphine equivalents daily, but specifically for patients beginning opioid therapy. It also allows that some patients may benefit from more than 90 mg, so the claim overstates the recommendation as an unqualified maximum. The ACT patients’ doses are the citing authors’ observation, not a finding attributed to this guideline. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Merskey H, Bogduk N; Task Force on Taxonomy of the International Associa- tion for the Study of Pain. Classification of chronic pain, second edition (revised). Seattle (WA): International Association for the Study of Pain; 1994.
  2. New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. Preventing misuse of prescription opioid drugs. City Health Information 2011;30:23-30.
  3. College endorses the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's guide- lines for prescribing opioids for chronic pain [media release]. Halifax (NS): Col- lege of Physicians & Surgeons of Nova Scotia; 2016. Available: www.cpsns.ns. ca/News/Press-Releases/Details/ArticleId/266/College-Endorses-CDC-Guidelines -for-Prescribing-Opioids-for-Chronic-Pain (accessed 2017 Mar. 11).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Busse, J. W., Craigie, S., Juurlink, D. N., Buckley, D. N., Wang, L., Couban, R. J., Agoritsas, T., Akl, E. A., Carrasco-Labra, A., Cooper, L., Cull, C., da Costa, B. R., Frank, J. W., Grant, G., Iorio, A., Persaud, N., Stern, S., Tugwell, P., Vandvik, P. O., & Guyatt, G. H.
Affiliations
University of Bern (CH)
Venue
Canadian Medical Association Journal
Published
2017-05-07
Volume
189
Issue
18
Pages
E659-E666
ISSN
  • 0820-3946 (ISSN-L)
  • 1488-2329
OpenAlex
W2612284626
Cited by
707
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 37 · 2025: 58 · 2024: 71 · 2023: 59 · 2022: 82 · 2021: 107 · 2020: 105 · 2019: 86 · 2018: 67 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 3 · 2012: 1
FWCI
73.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Canadian Medical Association Journal (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Archive ouverte UNIGE (University of Geneva) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • BORIS (University Library Bern) (submittedVersion)
Funders
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (IK2 HX001914)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Anesthesia and Pain Management
Keywords
opioid therapy, chronic non-cancer pain, pain management, opioid prescribing
MeSH terms
Analgesics, Opioid, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Humans, Opioid-Related Disorders, Pain Measurement, Primary Health Care, Treatment Outcome, Drug Monitoring, Chronic Pain

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