https://www.painevidence.com.au/case-notes/ Notes on published Tribunal decisions about NDIS and chronic pain. en-AU https://www.painevidence.com.au/case-notes/brown-2025-arta-2029/ https://www.painevidence.com.au/case-notes/brown-2025-arta-2029/ Supports approved. Two specific items, each tied to an accepted impairment, with cheaper options ruled out on the record. https://www.painevidence.com.au/case-notes/butler-2025-arta-1579/ https://www.painevidence.com.au/case-notes/butler-2025-arta-1579/ Supports refused. The recommendations repeated the participant's own list, and the evidence never said which part served the accepted impairments. https://www.painevidence.com.au/case-notes/kdkj-2026-arta-1166/ https://www.painevidence.com.au/case-notes/kdkj-2026-arta-1166/ Supports reduced. Reports that described progress without measuring it were given little weight, and hydrotherapy was refused on value for money. https://www.painevidence.com.au/case-notes/nnfxt-2026-arta-308/ https://www.painevidence.com.au/case-notes/nnfxt-2026-arta-308/ Supports refused. The opinions for the request were sincerely held but secondhand, and the objective record decided it. https://www.painevidence.com.au/case-notes/rydyr-2026-arta-1273/ https://www.painevidence.com.au/case-notes/rydyr-2026-arta-1273/ Access refused on s 24(1)(c). The report described her as independent in all six activity areas, and the figures decided every domain. https://www.painevidence.com.au/case-notes/harding-2025-arta-373/ https://www.painevidence.com.au/case-notes/harding-2025-arta-373/ Access granted. Assessed task by task the Tribunal would not have found the domain made out; on a whole-day view it did. https://www.painevidence.com.au/case-notes/nematian-2025-arta-2439/ https://www.painevidence.com.au/case-notes/nematian-2025-arta-2439/ Access granted on the psychosocial impairments. The pain claim refused on permanence, and the functional evidence attached to it went with it.