Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 434

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Correlation of patient and caregiver ratings of cancer pain

Open access
Grossman, Stuart A., Sheidler, Vivian R., Swedeen, Karen, Mucenski, John, Piantadosi, Steven·1991·Journal of Pain and Symptom Management

Abstract

Undertreatment of cancer pain is widely recognized. This study sought to determine if inadequate communication about pain intensity between health care providers and their patients could represent a significant factor interfering with the control of cancer pain. One hundred and three consecutive patients with solid tumors and normal mental status examinations were screened within 48 hr during two study periods. The intensity of patient pain was assessed using a visual analogue scale (VAS) which was given to the patient, his/her primary care nurse, house officer and medical oncology fellow. Sixty-three percent of the patients were taking narcotic analgesics on admission to the hospital. Although there was a correlation between patient and health care provider ratings for the entire group, no statistically significant correlation between the patient's VAS pain score and that of his/her nurse, house officer, or oncology fellow was present in the 44 patients with VAS greater than or equal to 4.0. Agreement between patient and caregiver VAS scores was also examined. When patients rated their pain from 7-10 on the VAS scale, nurses, house officers, and oncology fellows would place their rating of the patient's pain in this range 7%, 20%, and 27% of the time, respectively. Improved correspondence was noted with lower patient VAS scores. This study demonstrates that health care provider impressions of patient pain are often quite different than those of the patient and that these discrepancies are most pronounced in patients with significant pain. The routine use of pain assessment tools, such as the VAS, could enhance patient-caregiver communication and improve care for patients with cancer pain.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0885-3924(91)90518-9

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 434

Metadata

Authors
Grossman, S. A., Sheidler, V. R., Swedeen, K., Mucenski, J., & Piantadosi, S.
Venue
Journal of Pain and Symptom Management
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1991-02
Volume
6
Issue
2
Pages
53-57
ISSN
0885-3924 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2093134136
Cited by
434
References
1
FWCI
14.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Correlation of patient and caregiver ratings of cancer pain. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/0885-3924(91)90518-9
The paper
Grossman, S. A., Sheidler, V. R., Swedeen, K., Mucenski, J., & Piantadosi, S. (1991). Correlation of patient and caregiver ratings of cancer pain. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management. https://doi.org/10.1016/0885-3924(91)90518-9

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.