Validation of the Adolescent Pediatric Pain Tool for the Multidimensional Measurement of Pain in Children and Adolescents Diagnosed with Osteogenesis Imperfecta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The Adolescent Pediatric Pain Tool (APPT) is a self-reported, multidimensional assessment of pain location, intensity, and quality in children and adolescents. Yet, it has not been validated for use in children and adolescents with osteogenesis imperfecta (OI).Aims: This study aimed to validate and evaluate the feasibility of the APPT for pain assessment in children and adolescents with OI.Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted at a university-affiliated pediatric hospital in Canada. Thirty-three children and adolescents with OI participated by completing the APPT pre-bisphosphonate intravenous infusion and 1 week post-bisphosphonate intravenous infusion. Main outcomes were internal consistency, convergent and discriminative validity, and feasibility.Results: The Kuder-Richardson test of internal consistency was 0.863, 0.661, and 0.729 for the Sensory, Affective, and Evaluative subscales, respectively. For the entire pain quality scale, the Cronbach’s alpha was 0.835. Regarding convergent validity, a moderate correlation was observed between the ratings on the pain intensity scale and the Faces Pain Scale–Revised (Spearman’s rho = 0.711). Patients for whom pain was a problem reported higher pain intensity (Mann Whitney U = 41.50, P = 0.032) and more pain quality descriptors (Mann Whitney U = 45.50, P = 0.020) and painful body areas (Mann-Whitney U = 25.50, P = 0.001) than those for whom it was not (Mann-Whitney U, P < 0.05). In terms of feasibility, completing the tool may require a considerable time commitment and assistance from a clinician or parent, especially if the patient is experiencing pain and provides detailed pain location and quality information by completing the APPT.Conclusions: This study suggests that the APPT is valid for the multidimensional assessment of pain in children and adolescents with OI, but feasibility needs to be enhanced.
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 | 0.013 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".