ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2025
Cultural tailoring of pain management approaches: a scoping review.
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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Cultural tailoring of pain management approaches: a scoping review.International journal for equity in health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.