ArticleOrthopedic reviews2026
Pain Catastrophizing in Orthopedic Surgery: A Bibliometric Analysis of Global Research Trends, Collaborative Networks, and Clinical Implications (2001-2026).
Article in Orthopedic reviews, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Pain catastrophizing is a pain-related cognitive construct involving persistent rumination about pain, magnification of pain threat, and feelings of helplessness. In musculoskeletal and perioperative contexts, higher catastrophizing is associated with greater pain intensity, disability, distress, delayed recovery, opioid use, and healthcare utilization. Within orthopedic populations, preoperative psychological status is increasingly recognized as relevant to postoperative pain and patient-reported outcomes. Objective: To analyze worldwide research patterns on pain catastrophizing from 2001 to 2026 in orthopedic surgery, including publication growth, document types, subject categories, journals, institutions, funding bodies, and co-authorship networks. Methods: A bibliometric analysis was performed using Web of Science Core Collection records related to pain catastrophizing and orthopedic or musculoskeletal surgery. Records were exported and analyzed through VOSviewer network mapping. Results: The dataset was dominated by original articles (1,173 visible records), followed by review articles (95). Annual output was modest in the early 2000s, increased after 2008, and showed sustained growth through the early and mid-2020s, with lower 2026 counts reflecting incomplete indexing. The most visible subject categories were Neurosciences/Neurology, Orthopedics, Anesthesiology, Rehabilitation, and General/Internal Medicine. The leading journals included Pain, Journal of Pain, Clinical Journal of Pain, European Journal of Pain, and Pain Medicine. Institution and author maps showed visible collaboration hubs, including major contributions from Harvard-affiliated institutions and investigators such as David Ring, Steven Z. George, Mira Meeus, Mark P. Jensen, Michael J. Sullivan, Jo Nijs, Robert R. Edwards, and Lars Arendt-Nielsen. Conclusions: Pain catastrophizing research in orthopedic surgery has become a sustained, interdisciplinary literature. The field is strongly rooted in pain science, but its clinical meaning is closely tied to psychiatry and behavioral health because catastrophizing connects fear, mood, coping, opioid use, rehabilitation behavior, and surgical recovery.
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.