MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149174813 · doi:10.1016/s0304-3959(01)00314-1

The Faces Pain Scale – Revised: toward a common metric in pediatric pain measurement

2001· article· en· W2149174813 on OpenAlexaff
Carrie L. Hicks, Carl L. von Baeyer, Pamela A. Spafford, Inez van Korlaar, Belinda Goodenough

Bibliographic record

VenuePain · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Pain Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetric (unit)Scale (ratio)MedicinePain managementPain scalePhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyGeographyCartographyEngineeringOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Faces Pain Scale (FPS; Bieri et al., Pain 41 (1990) 139) is a self-report measure used to assess the intensity of children's pain. Three studies were carried out to revise the original scale and validate the adapted version. In the first phase, the FPS was revised from its original seven faces to six, while maintaining its desirable psychometric properties, in order to make it compatible in scoring with other self-rating and observational scales which use a common metric (0-5 or 0-10). Using a computer-animated version of the FPS developed by Champion and colleagues (Sydney Animated Facial Expressions Scale), psychophysical methods were applied to identify four faces representing equal intervals between the scale values representing least pain and most pain. In the second phase, children used the new six-face Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) to rate the intensity of pain from ear piercing. Its validity is supported by a strong positive correlation (r=0.93, N=76) with a visual analogue scale (VAS) measure in children aged 5-12 years. In the third phase, a clinical sample of pediatric inpatients aged 4-12 years used the FPS-R and a VAS or the colored analogue scale (CAS) to rate pain during hospitalization for surgical and non-surgical painful conditions. The validity of the FPS-R was further supported by strong positive correlations with the VAS (r=0.92, N=45) and the CAS (r=0.84, N=45) in this clinical sample. Most children in all age groups including the youngest were able to use the FPS-R in a manner that was consistent with the other measures. There were no significant differences between the means on the FPS-R and either of the analogue scales. The FPS-R is shown to be appropriate for use in assessment of the intensity of children's acute pain from age 4 or 5 onward. It has the advantage of being suitable for use with the most widely used metric for scoring (0-10), and conforms closely to a linear interval scale.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.124

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.245 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations2,055
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePainSame topicPediatric Pain Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207