ReviewBrain sciences2025
FDA-Regulated Clinical Trials vs. Real-World Data: How to Bridge the Gap in Pain Research.
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.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.