MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Construct Validity of the Parents' Postoperative Pain Measure

2003· article· en· W2008030282 on OpenAlexaff
G. Allen Finley, Christine T. Chambers, Patrick J. McGrath, Trudi M. Walsh

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Journal of Pain · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Pain Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaDalhousie UniversityIzaak Walton Killam Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnalgesicAnxietyConstruct validityIntervention (counseling)Physical therapyConstruct (python library)Pain assessmentPsychometricsClinical psychologyAnesthesiaPsychiatryPain management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Pain assessment can be a challenging task for parents, who increasingly provide the care for their children after surgery. This research provides evidence of the construct validity of the Parents' Postoperative Pain Measure (PPPM), a 15-item behavioral scale. METHODS: Study 1 examined the ability of scores on the PPPM to discriminate between pain and anxiety in a sample of 75 children (30 girls) between the ages of 7 and 12 years undergoing day surgery. Study 2 examined the sensitivity of scores on the PPPM to analgesic intervention among a sample of 28 children (7 girls) between the ages of 7 and 12 years undergoing day surgery. RESULTS: In Study 1, scores on the PPPM closely followed the pattern of children's self-reported pain intensity and not state-related anxiety. Results from Study 2 showed that scores on the PPPM, like children's self-reported pain intensity ratings, were sensitive to analgesic intervention. DISCUSSION: The results of these studies provide further support for the construct validity of the PPPM and confirm that the measure is a valid pain assessment tool for use by parents at home following children's surgeries.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.031
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0310.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.078
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations49
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Journal of PainSame topicPediatric Pain Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207