MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4417009647 · doi:10.1182/blood-2025-4722

The psychometric properties of the stoplight pain scale in children with sickle cell disease

2025· article· en· W4417009647 on OpenAlexaff
Amy L. Drendel, Daniel S. Tsze, Samina Ali, Fahd A. Ahmad, Gladstone Airewele, Bolanle Akinsola, Nitya Bakshi, David C. Brousseau, Kathleen M. Brown, Andrew Campbell, T. Charles Casper, Todd P. Chang, Corrie E. Chumpitazi, Daniel M. Cohen, Keli Coleman, Andrea T. Cruz, Christopher Denton, Angela M. Ellison, Melanie E. Fields, Monica Harding, Dunia Hatabah, Hailey Jensen, Rawan Korman, Sara Leibovich, Chris A. Rees, Allison Remiker, Nidhi Singh, Alexis A. Thompson, Elliott Vichinsky, Anthony Villella, Bridget Wynn, Carlton Dampier, Claudia R. Morris

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Pain Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObservational studyPain scaleRating scalePain assessmentDiseaseScale (ratio)Prospective cohort studyRandomized controlled trialIntervention (counseling)Emergency department

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Effective pain management begins with accurate pain assessment for children with sickle cell disease (SCD) experiencing a vaso-occlusive episodes (VOE). While most scales measure pain, these traditional tools do not guide therapeutic intervention directly and rely on a healthcare provider to decide what to do instead of allowing the child to direct it. The Stoplight Pain Scale (SPS) is a novel, child friendly, 3-face scale that integrates pain assessment with guidance for its management. Combining a red-yellow-green color scheme with cartoon faces and directive action phrases, SPS categorizes pain as “green” (I'm ok; I feel fine right now), “yellow” (I'm not sure; Ask me again later), and “red” (I hurt; I need something to feel better). SPS has shown early promise in assessing acute pain in children, but its validity for use in SCD-VOE, particularly for repeated measures over time, has not been previously investigated. Objective: To evaluate the validity of the SPS in children with SCD-VOE presenting to the emergency department. Methods: This prospective observational cohort study was a planned sub-study of a multicenter phase-3 randomized controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of intravenous arginine for SCD-VOE. Endorsed by the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN) and conducted at 10 US sites from 2022-2024, the study enrolled children aged 3 to 21 years. Participants rated their pain using the SPS and verbal Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at enrollment and daily through hospital discharge. Descriptive statistics and correlations were calculated overall and then stratified by age using cluster bootstrapped 95% confidence intervals to account for repeated measures. Pearson correlation coefficients between the two scales at the first, last, lowest, and highest recorded measures were also computed and assessed. Results: Ninety-eight participants contributed 394 assessments for up to 8 hospital days. The mean (SD) child age was 13.0 (4.6) years; 46% were male, 74% had HB-SS genotype, and 44% reported >3 hospitalizations in the prior year. At enrollment, pain severity using SPS was “green” in 17.2%, “yellow” in 37.9%, and “red” in 44.8%. Median (IQR) NRS pain score was 7 (5, 9). SPS and NRS scores were strongly correlated (r=0.77; 95% CI 0.72, 0.82), supporting convergent validity which demonstrated the degree to which these two tools that are intended to measure pain produced similar results. Correlation was strong for lowest reported values (r =0.73; p<0.001) and moderate for highest reported values (r=0.64; p=0.001). Correlation was better for children aged 6-12 years (r=0.83; 95% CI 0.77, 0.89) compared to 13–17-year-olds (r=0.70; 95% CI 0.59, 0.80) and those greater than 17 years (r=0.65; 95% CI 0.45, 0.78). Discriminant validity was supported by changes in pain scores from the first to the last recorded measure: “green” increased from 19.6% at enrollment to 62.9% at discharge, while “red” decreased from 43.3% to 13.4%. SPS demonstrated responsiveness to change by detecting meaningful changes over time, particularly in response to hospital interventions resulting in decreasing “red” and increasing “green” responses over hospitalization days; for example, “red” decreased from 50% on day 1 to 18% on day 8; and “green” increased from 17% on day 1 to 55% on day 3. Conclusion: The SPS demonstrated good convergent validity, discriminant validity and responsiveness to change in children with SCD-VOE. Overall, there is evidence that this simple, easy-to-implement SPS is a valid assessment tool for children with SCD-VOE. This holds value in the pediatric emergency department setting to rapidly indicate need for analgesia, and its applications extend into reassessments in the inpatient setting. Notably, SPS may be particularly suitable for younger children, a vulnerable group for whom reliable pain assessment is challenging. Further research is warranted to investigate the role of this tool in improving the quality and timeliness of VOE pain management for children with SCD.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicPediatric Pain Management Techniques→French-language works237,207→