MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4417009647 · doi:10.1182/blood-2025-4722

The psychometric properties of the stoplight pain scale in children with sickle cell disease

2025· article· en· W4417009647 sur OpenAlexaff
Amy L. Drendel, Daniel S. Tsze, Samina Ali, Fahd A. Ahmad, Gladstone Airewele, Bolanle Akinsola, Nitya Bakshi, David C. Brousseau, Kathleen M. Brown, Andrew Campbell, T. Charles Casper, Todd P. Chang, Corrie E. Chumpitazi, Daniel M. Cohen, Keli Coleman, Andrea T. Cruz, Christopher Denton, Angela M. Ellison, Melanie E. Fields, Monica Harding, Dunia Hatabah, Hailey Jensen, Rawan Korman, Sara Leibovich, Chris A. Rees, Allison Remiker, Nidhi Singh, Alexis A. Thompson, Elliott Vichinsky, Anthony Villella, Bridget Wynn, Carlton Dampier, Claudia R. Morris

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiquePediatric Pain Management Techniques
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Alberta
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésObservational studyPain scaleRating scalePain assessmentDiseaseScale (ratio)Prospective cohort studyRandomized controlled trialIntervention (counseling)Emergency department

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Effective pain management begins with accurate pain assessment for children with sickle cell disease (SCD) experiencing a vaso-occlusive episodes (VOE). While most scales measure pain, these traditional tools do not guide therapeutic intervention directly and rely on a healthcare provider to decide what to do instead of allowing the child to direct it. The Stoplight Pain Scale (SPS) is a novel, child friendly, 3-face scale that integrates pain assessment with guidance for its management. Combining a red-yellow-green color scheme with cartoon faces and directive action phrases, SPS categorizes pain as “green” (I'm ok; I feel fine right now), “yellow” (I'm not sure; Ask me again later), and “red” (I hurt; I need something to feel better). SPS has shown early promise in assessing acute pain in children, but its validity for use in SCD-VOE, particularly for repeated measures over time, has not been previously investigated. Objective: To evaluate the validity of the SPS in children with SCD-VOE presenting to the emergency department. Methods: This prospective observational cohort study was a planned sub-study of a multicenter phase-3 randomized controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of intravenous arginine for SCD-VOE. Endorsed by the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN) and conducted at 10 US sites from 2022-2024, the study enrolled children aged 3 to 21 years. Participants rated their pain using the SPS and verbal Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at enrollment and daily through hospital discharge. Descriptive statistics and correlations were calculated overall and then stratified by age using cluster bootstrapped 95% confidence intervals to account for repeated measures. Pearson correlation coefficients between the two scales at the first, last, lowest, and highest recorded measures were also computed and assessed. Results: Ninety-eight participants contributed 394 assessments for up to 8 hospital days. The mean (SD) child age was 13.0 (4.6) years; 46% were male, 74% had HB-SS genotype, and 44% reported >3 hospitalizations in the prior year. At enrollment, pain severity using SPS was “green” in 17.2%, “yellow” in 37.9%, and “red” in 44.8%. Median (IQR) NRS pain score was 7 (5, 9). SPS and NRS scores were strongly correlated (r=0.77; 95% CI 0.72, 0.82), supporting convergent validity which demonstrated the degree to which these two tools that are intended to measure pain produced similar results. Correlation was strong for lowest reported values (r =0.73; p<0.001) and moderate for highest reported values (r=0.64; p=0.001). Correlation was better for children aged 6-12 years (r=0.83; 95% CI 0.77, 0.89) compared to 13–17-year-olds (r=0.70; 95% CI 0.59, 0.80) and those greater than 17 years (r=0.65; 95% CI 0.45, 0.78). Discriminant validity was supported by changes in pain scores from the first to the last recorded measure: “green” increased from 19.6% at enrollment to 62.9% at discharge, while “red” decreased from 43.3% to 13.4%. SPS demonstrated responsiveness to change by detecting meaningful changes over time, particularly in response to hospital interventions resulting in decreasing “red” and increasing “green” responses over hospitalization days; for example, “red” decreased from 50% on day 1 to 18% on day 8; and “green” increased from 17% on day 1 to 55% on day 3. Conclusion: The SPS demonstrated good convergent validity, discriminant validity and responsiveness to change in children with SCD-VOE. Overall, there is evidence that this simple, easy-to-implement SPS is a valid assessment tool for children with SCD-VOE. This holds value in the pediatric emergency department setting to rapidly indicate need for analgesia, and its applications extend into reassessments in the inpatient setting. Notably, SPS may be particularly suitable for younger children, a vulnerable group for whom reliable pain assessment is challenging. Further research is warranted to investigate the role of this tool in improving the quality and timeliness of VOE pain management for children with SCD.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,007
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,007
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,036

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0070,023
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,002
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,005
Tête enseignante GPT0,205
Écart entre enseignants0,200 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBlood→Même sujetPediatric Pain Management Techniques→Travaux en français237 207→