{
  "abstract": "Chronic non-cancer pain, a disabling and distressing condition which is common in adults, has been declared a global public health concern and economic burden. 1 Many people who experience this condition for several months usually visit a therapist searching for a possible solution to face it. Despite therapists having specific established protocols to relieve pain (ie, treatment as usual (TAU)), it would be beneficial to apply interventions that could have similar or superior effectiveness and potentially cause fewer side effects than pharmacological treatments, such as cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT). Thus, searching for evidence on the effectiveness of CBT versus TAU to alleviate pain, we found a systematic review, ‘Psychological therapies for the management of chronic pain (excluding headache) in adults2’, that synthesised this evidence. The authors of the review found that ‘CBT over TAU showed small benefits at treatment end for pain (standardised mean difference (SMD)=−0.22; 95% CI −0.33 to −0.10)’, which can be read as an average reduction in pain of 0.22 SD with a 95% CI of 0.10 to 0.33 SDs. As a therapist, I find this metric a bit confusing: what does a reduction of 0.22 SDs really mean? What is the clinical magnitude of this effect? And, in a nutshell, should I use CBT instead of TAU to tackle pain in adults with chronic pain?",
  "authors": [
    {
      "affiliations": [
        "Global Health Economics and Epidemiology Department, Insights, Evidence & Value Division, Strategic Solutions ICON plc, Barcelona, Spain"
      ],
      "name": "Daniel Gallardo-Gómez"
    },
    {
      "affiliations": [
        "Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, England, UK"
      ],
      "name": "Kerry Dwan"
    }
  ],
  "title": "Standardised mean difference",
  "uid": "c5676aeb-56a3-5941-91fc-bf2142c40cbd"
}