Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Pain Research and Treatment
Volume 2012, Article ID 371248, 30 pages
Review Article

Epidemiology of Chronic Pain in Denmark and Sweden

1Kleijnen Systematic Reviews Ltd., 6 Escrick Business Park, Escrick, York YO19 6FD, UK
2KJ Research, Rosemere, QC, Canada J7A 4N8
3BeSyRe Bekkering Systematic Reviews, 2440 Geel, Belgium
4Center for Evidence Based Medicine, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
5Leuven Centre for Cancer Prevention, University Hospital Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
62nd Department of Internal Medicine, Jagiellonian University Medical College, 31-066 Krakow, 8 Skawinska Street, Poland
7School for Public Health and Primary Care (CAPHRI), University of Maastricht, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands

Received 1 February 2012; Accepted 7 February 2012

Academic Editor: Donald A. Simone

Copyright © 2012 Julie Harker et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Supplementary Material

Appendix 1 is the full Medline Strategy we utilised for the searches. This strategy was adapted specifically for each subsequent database and the keywords associated with epidemiology and chronic pain were adapted according to the thesaurus and configuration of each individual database. Appendix 2 is a list of clinical questions that were addressed systematically in our literature review. The reviews were initially conducted separately with each question being applied for each country. Where results are not presented for a particular question, this is because either (a) no papers were found addressing the question or (b) information/data found was not considered to be of appropriate study quality or relevance to the review. Appendix 3 describes the detailed quality assessment criteria which we used to assess each included study. All studies were assessed on all eight criteria/questions, and finally a score was generated (see section 9) to assign a risk of bias for each study i.e. low, medium or high risk. Appendix 4 contains the results of the quality assessment for each included study from Denmark and Sweden. The parameters 1-8 reflect the answers/scoring to Questions 1-8 on the quality assessment measure (see Appendix 3). The final column shows the risk of bias assessed for each individual study.

  1. Supplementary Material
  2. Supplementary Material