The Adolescent Pediatric Pain Tool: psychometric properties of the Portuguese version
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction and aims\nLong lasting illnesses such as cancer require a multidimensional pain assessment that can provide a more complete understanding of the pain experienced by subjects.\nThe Adolescent Pediatric Pain Tool (APPT) is a measure of the location, intensity and quality of pain, validated in English and Spanish for children and adolescents 8 to 17 years. The measure of location consists of a body outline diagram; the measure of intensity is a 10 centimeter word graphic rating scale; the measure of pain quality is a list of 67 descriptors categorized in sensory, affective, evaluative and temporal dimensions.\nThis study examined the properties of the Portuguese version of the APPT, which was previously submitted to semantic and cultural validation.\n\nMethods\nEighty-eight children and adolescents (8-17 years old) with cancer, either hospitalized or in the out-patient clinic, were asked to report their pain using the APPT. If they were not in pain, they were asked to recall their last pain episode. A principal component analysis (PCA) was conducted. We analysed if type of tumour and time elapsed since the diagnosis were related to the total number of pain descriptors used and to the number of descriptors in each dimension. We also examined the correlation between pain intensity and the number of descriptors and number of locations marked. \n\nResults\nAll descriptors were used by at least one child. Only one child suggested a new word. PCA with 4 factors explained 29,48% of the variance. Two factors contain mainly sensory descriptors; one factor includes a mix of sensory and affective descriptors and one factor a mix of sensory and temporal descriptors.\nType of tumour and time elapsed since diagnosis were not related to the total number of descriptors used, to the number of descriptors used in each dimension. The correlation between pain intensity and the numbers of descriptors used was significant (p< 0,001, r=0,38).\n\nDiscussion\nIn the Portuguese version, the list of words seems to represent a sensory, an affective and a temporal dimension. The results are not very different from those of the original scale, although the restricted range of variance and small sample size should be considered. Concurrent validity may be supported by the correlation between pain intensity and the numbers of descriptors used.\n\nConclusion \nThe Portuguese version of the APPT is a promising tool to assess pain in a multidimensional way, requiring further research.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".