Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 473

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Studies with different types of visual analog scales for measurement of pain

Sriwatanakul, Kampon, Kelvie, William, Lasagna, Louis, Calimlim, José F, Weis, Otto F, Mehta, Gita·1983·Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics

Abstract

We compared the sensitivity of different types of visual analog scales and of descriptive pain terms in healthy volunteers and in postoperative patients. One hundred and seven volunteers marked visual analog scales according to their perception of the descriptive pain terms--little, mild, some, moderate, severe, agonizing. Individual variation in values and preferences between the five following five different visual analog scales were analyzed: 10-cm linear horizontal and vertical scales, a curvilinear scale, and graded horizontal and curvilinear scales. Significantly more volunteers preferred the horizontal scale with gradations. Scores for the vertical linear scale had the greatest coefficient of variation and were least normally distributed. The majority of volunteers considered the phrase "agonizing pain" the best term defining the extreme limit of pain (X2(12) = 41.8, P less than 0.001). There were significant changes in the values of pain intensity measured on visual analog scales by patients using the same descriptive pain term on successive observations. However, the patients' values for pain terms in the preoperative pain-free state were not significantly different from those during postoperative pain. We conclude that graded linear horizontal scales are both more reliable and preferred by participants and that visual analog scales give a more sensitive and accurate representation of pain intensity than do descriptive pain scales.

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 · 10.1038/clpt.1983.159

Cites

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 473

Metadata

Authors
Sriwatanakul, K., Kelvie, W., Lasagna, L., Calimlim, J. F., Weis, O. F., & Mehta, G.
Venue
Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1983-08
Volume
34
Issue
2
Pages
234-239
ISSN
  • 0009-9236 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-6535
OpenAlex
W1987856010
Cited by
473
References
0
FWCI
4.56
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: Studies with different types of visual analog scales for measurement of pain. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/clpt.1983.159
The paper
Sriwatanakul, K., Kelvie, W., Lasagna, L., Calimlim, J. F., Weis, O. F., & Mehta, G. (1983). Studies with different types of visual analog scales for measurement of pain. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics. https://doi.org/10.1038/clpt.1983.159

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.