Introduction: Osteopathy is an emergent health-care profession, present in most of the developed world and since 2013, regulated in Portugal. Osteopaths intervene in a range of health issues in which pain is a very common aspect. Pain is a worldwide problem, affecting all aspects of society. Measurement of pain objectively is yet not possible; even considered unreliable in many circumstances, the standard is selfreported questionnaires. A variety of different scales were used to measure the intensity of pain in Osteopathic research; however, the criteria of the options are not always clear or reported. This review aims to analyze and critically compare the different characteristics of the most used questionnaires by osteopathic researchers for assessing the intensity of pain in randomized controlled trials (RCT). Methodology: A literature search was conducted using 7 electronic databases. This search was conducted for RCT articles studying the efficacy/effectiveness of the osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) intervention in pain. The findings followed the PRISMA statement. Included studies were assessed for the risk of bias (RoB) using the Jadad score. Results and Discussion: 123 studies were identified, and after removal of duplicates and application of the eligibility criteria, 21 articles were included for this review. Nine studies used the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) 10cm scale, seven the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) 11 points scale, the remaining used other options. Although similar, there are differences in these two scales that may affect the outcomes. Justification of the choice of the evaluation instrument was not always present and not associated with the methodology and the target population. The overall quality of the studies, in terms of RoB, was considered good. Conclusion: VAS and NRS are the choices of most authors. Authors in Osteopathy, or other health care professions should be very clear about the reasons behind the choices for measuring the intensity of pain; these should fit the objectives and study design.