Comment from National Campaign to Protect People in Pain
AnonymousSupportIndividual
Summary: A healthcare educator with three decades of experience argues for the immediate regulation and eventual abolishment of NarxCare. The commenter contends that the tool lacks clinical nuance, is not independently validated, and unfairly discriminates against patients by replacing individualized care with biased algorithms.
Posted this morning on the Federal Register, in response to the petition of the Doctor Patient forum: a comment on their petition to the US FDA to regulate NarxCare.
=============
As a healthcare educator with three decades of experience and over 350 papers published in peer reviewed journals and mass media, I urge the immediate regulation of NarxCare as a supposedly "predictive" instrument for patient risk from opioid prescribing. This step should be the first in a series leading to the abolishment of this instrument.
NarxCare has never been independently validated in published trials. It significantly lacks nuance in the evaluation of differences in pain or surrounding circumstances of individuals who have consistently been victimized by its use. It is presently applied as an EXCUSE for denying care, not an analysis of real risks of real patients.
For additional details concerning the weaknesses and dangers of Narxcare, I refer the reader to Neil Anand, MD, Mark Ibsen MD, and Richard A Lawhern PhD, “American Style Secret “Skulduggery” – Fatal Flaws of Narxcare -- What Mark Twain Would Say about Predictive Medicine," World Journal of Pharmaceutical and Medical Research, wjpmr, 2025, 11(10), 392-395, September 30, 2025, https://www.wjpmr.com/home/article_abstract/6959