Establishing Intra‐ and Inter‐Rater Agreement of the Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability Scale for Evaluating Pain in Toddlers During Immunization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability (FLACC) scale is a five-item tool that was developed to assess postoperative pain in young children. The tool is frequently used as an outcome measure in studies investigating acute procedural pain in young children; however, there are limited published psychometric data in this context. OBJECTIVE: To establish inter-rater and intrarater agreement of the FLACC scale in toddlers during immunization. METHODS: Participants comprised a convenience sample of toddlers recruited from an immunization drop-in service, who were part of a larger pilot randomized controlled trial. Toddlers were video- and audiotaped during immunization procedures. The first rater scored each video twice in random order over a period of three weeks (intrarater agreement), while the second rater scored each video once and was blinded to the first rater's scores (inter-rater agreement). The FLACC scale was scored at four timepoints throughout the procedure. Intraclass correlation coefficients were used to assess agreement of the FLACC scale. RESULTS: Thirty toddlers between 12 and 18 months of age were recruited, and video data were available for 29. Intrarater agreement coefficients were 0.88 at baseline, 0.97 at insertion of first needle, and 0.80 and 0.81 at 15 s and 30 s following the final injection, respectively. Inter-rater coefficients were 0.40 at baseline, 0.95 at insertion of first needle, and 0.81 and 0.78 at 15 s and 30 s following the final injection, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The FLACC scale has sufficient agreement in assessing pain in toddlers during immunizations, especially during the most painful periods of the procedure.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".