ArticleCureus2025
Opportunities for Shared Decision-Making in the Management of Acute Pain in Asia-Pacific Countries.
Article in Cureus, 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This expert elicitation involving nine key opinion leaders from Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand aimed to describe current gaps in post-operative pain (POP) and low back pain (LBP) management in Asia-Pacific (APAC) countries and provide recommendations for the adoption of shared decision-making in acute pain management. Gaps in acute pain management due to patient or healthcare professional (HCP) challenges were identified. Patient challenges include inadequate understanding of the consequences of poorly managed acute pain, the goals of pain management and how to manage acute pain at home, as well as non-adherence to pain medications. Additionally, HCPs may have limited time to discuss pain management and treatment goals with patients or insufficient training in how to assess and manage acute pain. Several solutions based on shared decision-making principles were identified. These include training HCPs in pain management to support timely assessment, diagnosis, and treatment, as well as best practices for effectively communicating information to patients (e.g., using the Seek, Help, Assess, Reach, Evaluate (SHARE) approach). Other solutions include implementing tools for assessing multiple aspects of patient pain, improving public awareness of available treatments, and the provision of accessible learning materials to improve patient understanding of POP, LBP, and available management options. Furthermore, adopting a multidisciplinary approach that fosters HCP collaboration and addresses the full pain experience may lead to more accurate diagnoses and improved treatment outcomes. Shared decision-making offers a solution to the current gaps in acute pain management in APAC countries. Educating patients and training HCPs will be key to achieving a mutual understanding of symptoms and available treatment, the basis of shared decision-making, potentially improving clinical outcomes.
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.