Reliability and validity of the Child Pain Anxiety Symptoms Scale (CPASS) in a clinical sample of children and adolescents with acute postsurgical pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pain anxiety refers to the cognitive, emotional, physiological, and behavioural reactions to the experience or anticipation of pain. The Child Pain Anxiety Symptoms Scale (CPASS) has recently been developed and validated in a pediatric community sample. The goal of the present study was to examine the psychometric properties of the CPASS in a sample of children and adolescents with acute postsurgical pain. Eightythree children aged 8–18 years (mean 13.8 years, SD 2.4) completed measures of pain anxiety, anxiety sensitivity, pain catastrophizing, anxiety, depression, and pain intensity and unpleasantness 48–72 hours after major surgery; and pain intensity and unpleasantness, pain anxiety, and functional disability approximately 2 weeks after discharge from the hospital. The CPASS showed excellent internal consistency (a = 0.915). Stronger partial correlations of pain anxiety with anxiety sensitivity (r = 0.70) and pain catastrophizing (r = 0.73) compared to pain anxiety with anxiety (r = 0.53) and depression (r = 0.59) suggest excellent construct validity. Pain anxiety was significantly associated with pain intensity (r = 0.44) and unpleasantness (r = 0.32) 48–72 hours after surgery (concurrent validity) and with pain unpleasantness (r = 0.29) and functional disability (r = 0.50; but not pain intensity, r = 0.20) 2 weeks later (predictive validity). The CPASS showed adequate sensitivity to change over time (mean change = 9.52; effect size = 0.49) and good sensitivity and specificity. The results of the present study provide initial validity and reliability of the CPASS in a clinical sample of children and adolescents after major surgery.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".