Trial reportThe journal of pain2025
PROGRESS: A patient-centered engagement infrastructure and multi-level approach to enrich diversity, equity, and inclusion in a national randomized online behavioral pain treatment study.
Trial report in The journal of pain, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Randomized comparative effectiveness study of 1-session vs 8-session online behavioral treatment for chronic pain: protocol for the national PROGRESS study.Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.) · 2026Trial
- Empowered Relief vs Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Patients With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus and Chronic Pain: Study Protocol for a National, Randomized, Noninferiority Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Beliefs about pain and lived experience of chronic pain among Korean Americans in the community: A qualitative study.The journal of pain · 2026Article
- Pain Catastrophizing, Pain Self-Efficacy, and their Interaction as Predictors of Health Outcomes in Chronic Pain.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Single Session Behavioral Interventions for Chronic Pain A Systematic Review and Meta Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.The journal of pain · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Twenty percent of individuals experience chronic pain worldwide posing significant challenges to those living with it. Pain research is crucial for developing and characterizing effective strategies to reduce the burden of chronic pain. Traditional research approaches often yield homogeneous study samples that poorly generalize and have unknown applicability across diverse patient populations. The Pain Relief with Online Groups that Empower Skills-based Symptom Reduction (PROGRESS) study aims to address disparities in pain research engagement and patient outcomes through the intentional inclusion of people with varied backgrounds and experiences of pain, and through a multilevel design informed by diverse stakeholder recommendations. The composition of three advisory boards (Patient Engagement and Diversity Board, Local Patient Advisory Board, and the National Patient Advisory Panel) prioritized diversity in patient/expert advisor background, geographic location, race, and ethnicity. Our engagement approach aligns with the Foundational Expectations for Partnerships in Research by Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), which emphasizes diverse representation, early and ongoing engagement, dedicated funds for advisor compensation, collaborative decision making, meaningful participation, and continuous assessment. The first 24 months of study advisor engagement has yielded multiple recruitment strategies resulting in a study population enriched with a breadth of identities within PROGRESS (e.g., inclusive patient-facing materials). Lessons learned underscore the importance of investing time in building patient and stakeholder relationships, trust, and embracing diverse viewpoints amongst the study team. PROGRESS demonstrates the potential of diverse patient-centered engagement to support evidence-based outcomes and practices that are more inclusive, equitable, and representative of the broader population. PERSPECTIVE: The PROGRESS study demonstrates how diverse patient engagement and inclusive advisory boards enhance research outcomes. By aligning with PCORI standards and employing innovative recruitment strategies, it highlights the vital role of stakeholder relationships and diverse perspectives. Key lessons learned emphasize adaptive strategies and continuous feedback for advancing equitable pain research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.