Evidence mapPaperPMID 39613529Full record

ArticleBritish journal of anaesthesia2025

A critical approach to research on perioperative pain management.

Girish P Joshi, Helene Beloeil, Dileep N Lobo, Esther M Pogatzki-Zahn, Axel R Sauter, Marc Van de Velde, Christopher L Wu, Henrik Kehlet, PROSPECT Working Group of the European Society of Regional Anaesthesia and Pain Therapy

Abstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of anaesthesia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Epidurals in esophagectomy: end of an era?Journal of thoracic disease · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Girish P JoshiDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Management, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA. Electronic address: girish.joshi@utsouthwestern.edu.
Helene BeloeilUniversity of Rennes, CHU Rennes, Inserm, OSS 12142, CIC 1414, Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Department, Rennes, France.
Dileep N LoboNottingham Digestive Diseases Centre, Division of Translational Medical Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK; National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust and University of Nottingham, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham, UK; MRC Versus Arthritis Centre for Musculoskeletal Ageing Research, School of Life Sciences, University of Nottingham, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham, UK; Division of Surgery, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Esther M Pogatzki-ZahnDepartment of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany.
Axel R SauterDivision of Emergencies and Critical Care, Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; Department of Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Marc Van de VeldeDepartment of Cardiovascular Sciences, KU Leuven and UZ Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Christopher L WuDepartment of Anesthesiology, Hospital for Special Surgery and Department of Anesthesiology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Henrik KehletSection for Surgical Pathophysiology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University, Copenhagen, Denmark.
PROSPECT Working Group of the European Society of Regional Anaesthesia and Pain Therapy

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Optimal postoperative pain management is a prerequisite for enhancing functional recovery after surgery. However, many studies assessing analgesic interventions have limitations. Consequently, further improvements in study design are urgently needed. In this focused editorial, we critically review prevalent trial designs and outcome measures including treatment-related adverse events evaluating analgesic interventions. Novel clinical trial designs should improve efficiency and enhance the likelihood of detecting relevant treatment effects. Cohort and database studies using propensity score matching and directed acyclic graphs could provide real-world generalisable information. Procedure-specific and patient-specific trials should allow identification of subpopulations most likely to benefit from a particular intervention after a specific surgical procedure and thus ascertain optimal analgesic strategies in challenging populations.

Indexed as

Pain ManagementPerioperative CarePostoperative PainAnalgesicsHumansResearch DesignAnalgesicsanalgesicsenhanced recovery after surgeryevidence baseperioperative painresearchstudy designtrials

Identifiers

PMID39613529
PMCPMC11867095

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.