The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The measurement of clinical pain intensity: a comparison of six methods
Abstract
The measurement of subjective pain intensity continues to be important to both researchers and clinicians. Although several scales are currently used to assess the intensity construct, it remains unclear which of these provides the most precise, replicable, and predictively valid measure. Five criteria for judging intensity scales have been considered in previous research: ease of administration of scoring; relative rates of incorrect responding; sensitivity as defined by the number of available response categories; sensitivity as defined by statistical power; and the magnitude of the relationship between each scale and a linear combination of pain intensity indices. In order to judge commonly used pain intensity measures, 75 chronic pain patients were asked to rate 4 kinds of pain (present, least, most, and average) using 6 scales. The utility and validity of the scales was judged using the criteria listed above. The results indicate that, for the present sample, the scales yield similar results in terms of the number of subjects who respond correctly to them and their predictive validity. However, when considering the remaining 3 criteria, the 101-point numerical rating scale appears to be the most practical index.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Validity and utility of the 11-point NRS is sufficient and it is responsive to changes in individuals [20-22].”
From Staying at work with chronic nonspecific musculoskeletal pain: a qualitative study of workers' experiences (2011) · cites this paper as [20]
Citations
Cites
Statistical principles in experimental design.
Winer, B. J. (1962) · McGraw-Hill Book Company · doi:10.1037/11774-000 · Cited by 27,137
The McGill Pain Questionnaire: Major properties and scoring methods
Melzack, R. (1975) · Pain · doi:10.1016/0304-3959(75)90044-5 · Cited by 6,873
Statistical Principles in Experimental Design
Green, P. E., Winer, B. J., Brown, D. R., & Michels, K. M. (1992) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3172747 · Cited by 4,333
Graphic representation of pain
Scott, J., & Huskisson, E. C. (1976) · Pain · doi:10.1016/0304-3959(76)90113-5 · Cited by 2,706
Studies with pain rating scales.
Downie, W., Leatham, P. A., Rhind, V. M., Wright, V. A., Branco, J. A., & Anderson, J. (1978) · Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases · doi:10.1136/ard.37.4.378 · Cited by 1,987
Chapman, C. R., Casey, K. L., Dubner, R. A., Foley, K. M., Gracely, R. H., & Reading, A. E. (1985) · Pain · doi:10.1016/0304-3959(85)90145-9 · Cited by 1,095
The Foundations of Factor Analysis.
Sheth, J. N., & Mulaik, S. A. (1975) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2285414 · Cited by 977
Pain and Behavioral Medicine: A Cognitive-Behavioral Perspective
Turk, D., Meichenbaum, D. H., Genest, M., & Berntzen, D. (1984) · Scandinavian Journal of Behaviour Therapy · doi:10.1080/16506078409455719 · Cited by 977
Ohnhaus, E. E., & Adler, R. (1975) · Pain · doi:10.1016/0304-3959(75)90075-5 · Cited by 797
Measurement of pain: Patient preference does not confound pain measurement
Kremer, E. F., Atkinson, H. J., & Ignelzi, R. J. (1981) · Pain · doi:10.1016/0304-3959(81)90199-8 · Cited by 595
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 1,001–1,009 of 1,009
Taylor, S. S., Davis, M. C., Yeung, E. W., Zautra, A. J., & Tennen, H. A. (2017) · Journal of Behavioral Medicine · doi:10.1007/s10865-016-9811-1 · Cited by 27
Ashwood, C., Waas, M., Weerasekera, R., & Gundry, R. L. (2020) · Journal of Molecular and Cellular Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.yjmcc.2019.12.012 · Cited by 25
De Pascalis, V., Varriale, V., & Cacace, I. (2015) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0128474 · Cited by 20
Daily diaries reveal influence of pessimism and anxiety on pain prediction patterns
Finan, P., Zautra, A., & Tennen, H. (2008) · Psychology & Health · doi:10.1080/08870440802108892 · Cited by 18
Meek, B. P., Hill, S., & Modirrousta, M. (2021) · Brain Injury · doi:10.1080/02699052.2020.1857837 · Cited by 16
Alschuler, K. N., & Otis, J. D. (2014) · Psychological Services · doi:10.1037/a0036201 · Cited by 13
Intranasal Ketamine for Abortive Migraine Therapy in Pediatric Patients: A Single-Center Review
Turner, A. L., Shandley, S., Miller, E., Perry, M. S., & Ryals, B. (2020) · Pediatric Neurology · doi:10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2019.10.007 · Cited by 11
Fink, M., Ismail, F., Heßling, K., Fischer, M., Stiesch-Scholz, M., & Demling, A. (2007) · Manuelle Medizin · doi:10.1007/s00337-007-0524-y · Cited by 5
Greenough, M., Bucknall, T., Jibb, L., Lewis, K., Lamontagne, C., & Squires, J. E. (2022) · Frontiers in Pain Research · doi:10.3389/fpain.2022.1001028 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Jensen, M. P., Karoly, P., & Braver, S.
- Affiliations
- Arizona State University (US)
- Venue
- Pain
- Published
- 1986-10
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 117-126
- ISSN
- 0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2064475745
- Cited by
- 3,275
- References
- 26
- Citations by year
- 2026: 110 · 2025: 119 · 2024: 116 · 2023: 108 · 2022: 129 · 2021: 155 · 2020: 149 · 2019: 143 · 2018: 130 · 2017: 119 · 2016: 114 · 2015: 106 · 2014: 112 · 2013: 120 · 2012: 118
- FWCI
- 13.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Pain (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
- Keywords
- pain intensity assessment, pain intensity scales, chronic pain, numerical rating scale, scale validity, predictive validity, scale sensitivity
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Age Factors, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pain Measurement, Surveys and Questionnaires
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
