MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2399621959 · doi:10.1097/pec.0000000000000791

Defining No Pain, Mild, Moderate, and Severe Pain Based on the Faces Pain Scale–Revised and Color Analog Scale in Children With Acute Pain

2016· article· en· W2399621959 on OpenAlex
Daniel S. Tsze, Gerrit Hirschfeld, Peter S. Dayan, Blake Bulloch, Carl L. von Baeyer

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Emergency Care · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Pain Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyObservational studyPain scaleAcute painVisual analogue scalePain assessmentPain catastrophizingProspective cohort studyEthnic groupPain managementChronic painAnesthesiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to define the Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) and Color Analog Scale (CAS) scores associated with no pain, mild pain, moderate pain, and severe pain in children with acute pain, and to identify differences based on age, sex, and ethnicity. METHODS: We conducted a prospective observational study in 2 pediatric emergency departments of children aged 4 to 17 years with painful and nonpainful conditions. We assessed their pain intensity using the FPS-R, CAS, and qualitative measures. Pain score cut points that best differentiated adjacent categories of pain were identified using a receiver operating characteristic-based method. Cut points were compared within subgroups based on age, sex, and ethnicity. RESULTS: We enrolled 620 patients, of whom 314 had painful conditions. The mean age was 9.2 years; 315 (50.8%) were in the younger age group (aged 4-7 years); 291 (46.8%) were female; and 341 (55%) were Hispanic. The scores best representing categories of pain for the FPS-R were as follows: no pain, 0 and 2; mild pain, 4; moderate pain, 6; and severe pain, 8 and 10. For the CAS, these were 0 to 1, 1.25 to 2.75, 3 to 5.75, and 6 to 10, respectively. Children with no pain frequently reported nonzero pain scores. There was considerable overlap of scores associated with mild and moderate pain. There were no clinically meaningful differences of scores representing each category of pain based on age, ethnicity, and race. CONCLUSIONS: We defined pain scores for the FPS-R and CAS associated with categories of pain intensity in children with acute pain that are generalizable across subgroups based on patient characteristics. There were minor but potentially important differences in pain scores used to delineate categories of pain intensity compared to prior convention.

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.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.222 · 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