Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 306

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 46 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Patient-related barriers to pain management: the barriers questionnaire II (BQ-II)

Gunnarsdottir, Sigridur, Donovan, Heidi S., Serlin, Ronald C., Voge, Catherine, Ward, Sandra·2002·Pain

Abstract

Patients' beliefs can act as barriers to optimal management of cancer pain. The Barriers Questionnaire (BQ) is a tool used to evaluate such barriers. Here, the BQ has been revised to reflect changes in pain management practices, resulting in the Barriers Questionnaire-II (BQ-II), a 27-item, self report instrument. This paper presents the results from two studies where the psychometric properties of the BQ-II were evaluated. In the first study, the responses of 27 nurses trained in pain management were compared to responses of a convenience sample of 12 patients with cancer. The results indicated that patients with cancer had higher mean scores on the BQ-II than did nurses trained in pain management. In the second study, a convenience sample of 172 patients with cancer responded to the BQ-II and a set of pain and quality of life (QOL) measures. A factor analysis supported four factors. Factor one, physiological effects, consists of 12 items addressing the beliefs that side effects of analgesics are inevitable and unmanageable, concerns about tolerance, and concerns about not being able to monitor changes in one's body when taking strong pain medications. Factor two, Fatalism, consists of three items addressing fatalistic beliefs about cancer pain and its management. Factor three, Communication, consists of six items addressing the concern that reports of pain distract the physician from treating the underlying disease, and the belief that 'good' patients do not complain of pain. The fourth and final factor, harmful effects, consists of six items addressing fear of becoming addicted to pain medication and the belief that pain medications harm the immune system. The BQ-II total had an internal consistency of 0.89, and alpha for the subscales ranged from 0.75 to 0.85. Mean (SD) scores on the total scale was 1.52 (0.73). BQ-II scores were related to measures of pain intensity and duration, mood, and QOL. Patients who used adequate analgesics for their levels of pain had lower scores on the BQ-II than did patients who used inadequate analgesics. The BQ-II is a reliable and valid measure of patient-related barriers to cancer pain management.

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/s0304-3959(02)00243-9

Cites

46 of 46 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

Cites

Show all 46 references

Cited by

See all 306

Metadata

Authors
Gunnarsdottir, S., Donovan, H. S., Serlin, R. C., Voge, C., & Ward, S.
Venue
Pain
Published
2002-10
Volume
99
Issue
3
Pages
385-396
ISSN
0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1968116997
Cited by
306
References
46
FWCI
9.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Patient-related barriers to pain management: the barriers questionnaire II (BQ-II). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0304-3959(02)00243-9
The paper
Gunnarsdottir, S., Donovan, H. S., Serlin, R. C., Voge, C., & Ward, S. (2002). Patient-related barriers to pain management: the barriers questionnaire II (BQ-II). Pain. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0304-3959(02)00243-9

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.