Cited by 203Pain Management and Opioid UseCancer survivorship and carePediatric Pain Management Techniques

A validation study of an Italian version of the brief pain inventory (Breve questionario per la valutazione del dolore)

Caraceni, Augusto, Mendoza, Tito R., Mencaglia, Emanuela, Baratella, Claudio, Edwards, Katherine, Forjaz, Maria Joao, Martini, Cinzia, Serlin, Ronald C. +2 more·1996·Pain

Abstract

Aim of this study was to validate the Italian version of the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), Breve Questionario per la Valutazione del Dolore (BQVD), which is a multidimensional instrument to assess pain intensity and pain interference with daily functions. A group of 110 patients with cancer pain were enrolled in the study and were administered the BQVD and the Therapy Impact Questionnaire (TIQ) which is a valid instrument for quality of life assessment in cancer patients. Cronbach's alphas were computed for the interference and severity scales in assessing reliability. Confirmatory factor analysis was utilized to ascertain construct validity of the BQVD. Measures of interference and of intensity were calculated a priori from the TIQ result and were used in correlated correlations. Alpha coefficients for the pain severity and the pain interference scale were above 0.75. Confirmatory factor analysis showed that a 2-factor solution for the BQVD structure was interpretable and provided adequate fit for the data. The correlation with the TIQ items showed a stronger association between factor 1 (interference) and the interference with affect and activity measure from the TIQ, while factor 2 (severity) was more strongly associated with the TIQ pain severity measure. In comparison with other non-italian samples our results show a lower reliability estimate. Overall the analysis of these data shows that the BQVD is a useful and valid tool in assessing pain and its impact on patients' quality of life which could also help in developing international and cross-cultural studies in cancer pain.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0304-3959(95)00156-5

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Caraceni, A., Mendoza, T. R., Mencaglia, E., Baratella, C., Edwards, K., Forjaz, M. J., Martini, C., Serlin, R. C., de Conno, F., & Cleeland, C. S.
Affiliations
University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
Corresponding author
Caraceni, Augusto
Venue
Pain
Published
1996-04
Volume
65
Issue
1
Pages
87-92
ISSN
0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2020268362
Cited by
203
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 8
FWCI
1.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • American Cancer Society
  • National Cancer Institute (R01CA026582, CA 26582)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
Keywords
Brief Pain Inventory, Italian translation, cancer pain, pain intensity, pain interference, quality of life, psychometric validation, construct validity, reliability statistics, cross-cultural adaptation
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Evaluation Studies as Topic, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Italy, Language, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasms, Pain, Pain Measurement, Quality of Life, Reproducibility of Results, Treatment Outcome, Pain Management

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