Evidence mapPaperPMID 41154213Full record

ReviewBrain sciences2025

FDA-Regulated Clinical Trials vs. Real-World Data: How to Bridge the Gap in Pain Research.

Anthony Reyes, Mohummed Malik, Malik Sahouri, Nebojsa Nick Knezevic

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Anthony ReyesDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL 60612, USA.
Mohummed MalikDepartment of Anesthesiology, Advocate Illinois Masonic Medical Center, Chicago, IL 60657, USA.
Malik SahouriDepartment of Anesthesiology, Advocate Illinois Masonic Medical Center, Chicago, IL 60657, USA.
Nebojsa Nick KnezevicDepartment of Anesthesiology, Advocate Illinois Masonic Medical Center, Chicago, IL 60657, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8028-1495

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been regarded as the gold standard for evaluating the efficacy of treatments for chronic pain and are the foundation for regulatory approval and guideline development. However, their restrictive design and dependence on idealized populations can limit their applicability to the diverse patients seen in routine chronic pain management. Real-world data (RWD), collected from electronic medical records, registries, claims databases, and digital health platforms, can offer a more comprehensive view of treatment adherence and safety that RCTs often overlook. A key issue in pain medicine is the efficacy-effectiveness gap, where discrepancies exist between the outcomes of therapies and interventions in RCTs versus in real-world practice due to variations in patient populations and adherence. Bridging this gap ensures that observed improvements align with patients' preferred outcomes and functional goals. Integrating the strengths of RCTs and RWD provides a more comprehensive evidence base to guide clinical decision-making, influence reimbursement policies, and develop equitable guidelines. The primary aim of this paper is to identify factors used in FDA-regulated RCTs and RWD that could be implemented or enhanced in everyday practice to deliver more holistic and patient-centered care in the management of chronic pain.

Indexed as

chronic pain researchefficacy-effectiveness gapFDA clinical trialsrandomized controlled trialsreal-world datareal-world evidence

Identifiers

PMID41154213
PMCPMC12562589

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.