MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413107085 · doi:10.1192/j.eurpsy.2025.10074

Chronic pain in mental disorders: An umbrella review of the prevalence, risk factors, and treatments across 957,168 people with mental disorders and 16,606,910 controls

2025· review· en· W4413107085 on OpenAlexaffabout
Brendon Stubbs, Ruimin Ma, Marco Solmi, Nicola Veronese, Tine Van Damme, Eugenia Romano, Robert Stewart, Nilufar Mossaheb, Joseph Firth, Davy Vancampfort

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Psychiatry · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care South LondonNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsAction (physics)MedicinePsychiatryMental healthPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain (CP) and mental disorders often coexist, yet their relationship lacks comprehensive synthesis. This first hierarchical umbrella review examined systematic reviews and meta-analyses, also observational studies and randomized controlled trials (where reviews are currently lacking) to report CP prevalence, risk factors, and treatment across mental disorders. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, Web of Science, and CINAHL, identifying 20 studies on anxiety, depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, ADHD, autism, or dementia, and CP. Quality was assessed using AMSTAR and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: Prevalence varied widely-23.7% (95% CI 13.1-36.3) in bipolar disorder to 96% in PTSD-consistently exceeding general population rates (20-25%). Risks were elevated, with bidirectional links in depression (OR = 1.26-1.88). Risk factors included female gender, symptom severity, and socioeconomic disadvantage, though data were limited beyond PTSD and depression. Treatment evidence was sparse: cognitive behavioral therapy showed small effects on pain (SMD = 0.27, 95% CI -0.08-0.61), acupuncture with medication improved pain (MD = -1.06, 95% CI -1.65--0.47), and transcranial direct current stimulation reduced pain in dementia (d = 0.69-1.12). Methodological issues were evident, including heterogeneous designs and inconsistent pain definitions. CONCLUSIONS: This review confirms CP as a significant comorbidity in mental disorders. Clinicians should prioritize routine pain screening and multimodal treatments. Researchers need longitudinal studies with standardized assessments to clarify causality and improve interventions. Taken together, this work highlights an urgent need for integrated psychiatric care approaches, emphasizing that addressing CP could enhance mental health outcomes and overall patient well-being.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.009
Bibliometrics0.0270.022
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean PsychiatrySame topicBipolar Disorder and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207