Validation of the Parents' Postoperative Pain Measure in Finnish children aged 1–6 years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadian Parents' Postoperative Pain Measure (PPPM) is a behavioural pain measure for children. The purpose of this study was to test validity and reliability of this measure in 1-6-year-old Finnish children at home after minor day surgery. Children (n = 85) and their parents from four hospitals were included in the sample. The parents, mostly mothers (93%), filled in at home a questionnaire including PPPM during the day of operation, and the first and second postoperative days. Parents (n = 85) rated the presence or absence of behavioural changes from a checklist and also the child's worst pain during each day (using a Visual Analogue Scale, VAS). The response rate was 58. Principal component factor analysis, testing of correlation coefficient, cross-tabulations and Cronbach's alpha were used to test the instrument. The findings showed that construct validity of the measure was satisfactory. The PPPM was successful in discriminating between children who had no/low pain and children who had a clinically significant pain measured by VAS (convergence validity). Scores on the PPPM decreased from days 0 to 1 and from days 1 to 2 (predictive validity). Internal consistency of the measure and correlations with the pain scores on VAS were high on all days following surgery (equivalence). Sensitivity was satisfactory only when specificity was weaker. The findings of this study can be utilized in the development of children's postoperative pain assessment at home. However, further studies are needed to test the instrument in larger samples.
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 | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".