ArticleFrontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland)2026
Iterating the women in pain reduction and improved mood through empowerment intervention.
Article in Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland), 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To explain key adaptations made to a depression and pain intervention that addresses inequities in pain outcomes among older women. Design: The DAPPER (Depression and Pain Perseverance through Empowered Recovery) pilot study and the Women in PRIME (Pain Reduction and Improved Mood through Empowerment) study were randomized controlled trials using waitlist control designs. DAPPER focused on pain and depressive symptoms among middle-aged and older African American women who were pre-frail or frail, while Women in PRIME addressed similar symptoms among middle-aged and older women of all races living with physical disabilities. Methods: Ten DAPPER and eight Women in PRIME participants were interviewed post-intervention completion. Qualitative data for both studies was analyzed using a deductive qualitative content analysis approach. Quantitative data included descriptive statistics. Results: Seven changes were made from the DAPPER Study to the Women in PRIME Study. These changes included 1) Re-naming the intervention; 2) Adding retention practices; 3) Expanding to include women of all races; 4) Switching criterion of (pre)frailty to physical disability; 5) Adding group Acceptance & Commitment Therapy (ACT) sessions; 6) Reducing individual nurse visits from 8 to 5 visits; and 7) Switching from saliva to sweat patch for biomarker measurement. Conclusions: The changes made from DAPPER to Women in PRIME resulted in greater retention, participation in the intervention, and participation in the data collection timepoints. A critical component of equity-focused intervention iteration is ensuring that participant input and guidance directly shape the modifications and adaptations that advance the intervention toward larger scale trials.
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.