Authors
Bethea A Kleykamp, Robert H Dworkin, Dennis C Turk, Zubin Bhagwagar, Penney Cowan, Christopher Eccleston, Susan S Ellenberg, Scott R Evans, John T Farrar, Roy L Freeman, Louis P Garrison, Jennifer S Gewandter, Veeraindar Goli, Smriti Iyengar, Alejandro R Jadad, Mark P Jensen, Roderick Junor, Nathaniel P Katz, J Patrick Kesslak, Ernest A Kopecky, Dmitri Lissin, John D Markman, Michael P McDermott, Philip J Mease, Alec B O'Connor, Kushang V Patel, Srinivasa N Raja, Michael C Rowbotham, Cristina Sampaio, Jasvinder A Singh, Ilona Steigerwald, Vibeke Strand, Leslie A Tive, Jeffrey Tobias, Ajay D Wasan, Hilary D Wilson
Publication date
2022/6/1
Source
Pain
Volume
163
Issue
6
Pages
1006-1018
Publisher
LWW
Description
Chronic pain clinical trials have historically assessed benefit and risk outcomes separately. However, a growing body of research suggests that a composite metric that accounts for benefit and risk in relation to each other can provide valuable insights into the effects of different treatments. Researchers and regulators have developed a variety of benefit–risk composite metrics, although the extent to which these methods apply to randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of chronic pain has not been evaluated in the published literature. This article was motivated by an Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials consensus meeting and is based on the expert opinion of those who attended. In addition, a review of the benefit–risk assessment tools used in published chronic pain RCTs or highlighted by key professional organizations (ie, Cochrane, European Medicines Agency, Outcome …
Total citations
20222023202433