Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41422041›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2025

Cultural tailoring of pain management approaches: a scoping review.

Nourah Basalem, Anfal Adnan Astek, Roaa Abdulghani Sroge, Syed Mustafa Ali, Jaheeda Gangannagaripalli, Emma Stanmore, Sabine N van der Veer

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for equity in health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Cultural tailoring of pain management approaches: a scoping review.International journal for equity in health · 2025
    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

7 authors.

Nourah BasalemDivision of Informatics, Imaging and Data Science, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. nourah.basalem@postgrad.manchester.ac.uk.
Anfal Adnan AstekFaculty of Medical Rehabilitation Sciences, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Roaa Abdulghani SrogeFaculty of Applied Medical Sciences, Umm Al-Qura University, Makkah, Saudi Arabia.
Syed Mustafa AliDivision of Informatics, Imaging and Data Science, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Jaheeda GangannagaripalliHealthy Ageing Research Group, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Emma StanmoreHealthy Ageing Research Group, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Sabine N van der VeerDivision of Informatics, Imaging and Data Science, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPain affects an estimated 1.5 billion people globally. Cultural factors strongly influence how pain is perceived, communicated, and managed. However, it remains unclear to what extent, how, and for whom pain management approaches have been culturally tailored, and whether these adaptations have been evaluated to ensure cultural relevance and effectiveness. This scoping review addresses this gap.

methodsWe searched six electronic databases for peer-reviewed articles and grey literature, combining terms for pain and cultural tailoring. We included empirical studies (including protocols), published in English, that reported on the cultural tailoring of pain management approaches for adults (≥18 years). At least two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, followed by full text assessment. We charted data on study characteristics, cultural tailoring methods, and evaluation strategies, and synthesised results narratively.

resultsOur search identified 4,551 unique studies, of which we included 38. Of these, 32 (84%) were published after 2016, with 26 (68%) focusing on musculoskeletal pain. They reported the cultural tailoring of 27 unique pain management intervention approaches, of which 19 (70%) focused on racial and ethnic minorities mainly in high-income countries. Educational interventions were most commonly tailored (n = 9, 33%). Only four (15%) tailored approaches were delivered digitally. Most (n = 25, 93%) approaches underwent content adaptation through including culturally relevant language, metaphors, and gender considerations. Most employed early tailoring steps, such as information gathering (85%) and preliminary adaptation design (93%). Only six (22%) approaches used frameworks to guide the adaptation such as Intervention Mapping-Adapt, FRAME, and ADAPT-IT. The effectiveness of cultural tailoring was evaluated for 11 (41%) approaches, mainly through randomised controlled trials (n = 7, 26%).

conclusionThis review identified several efforts to culturally tailor pain management approaches, particularly for racial and ethnic minorities with musculoskeletal pain in high-income countries. Most tailoring focused on content adaptation for in-person formats, with limited use of contextual modifications, digital delivery, or adaptation frameworks. Future research should broaden tailoring beyond content changes, make greater use of digital tools, and prioritise adaptations in low- and middle-income countries. Evaluation strategies should also expand to assess real-world implementation, and long-term outcomes.

Indexed as

Culturally Competent CarePain ManagementAdultHumansCultural competencyCultural tailoringEthnic and racial minoritiesHealth inequitiesPain managementScoping review

Identifiers

PMID41422041
PMCPMC12752237

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.