The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Predictors of a child's ability to use a visual analogue scale
Abstract
Background Visual analogue scales (VAS) are used to assess the strength of perceptions of both children and adults in many clinical and research settings. Although the VAS has been shown by some authors to be reliable for use by children aged 5 years and older, others have proposed that young children, generally ≤ 7 years of age, may not have the conceptual ability to use a VAS. Objective To identify demographic and cognitive variables that would maximize the accuracy of predicting children's abilities to use a VAS. Methods Forty kindergarten children performed a seriation task, used a VAS to perform a calibration task and completed the Block Design and Vocabulary subtests of the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence – Revised (WPPSI‐R). An estimated IQ was calculated from the WPPSI‐R subtest scores. Socioeconomic status was assessed using the Hollingshead Four Factor Index of Social Status. Logistic regression was used to determine the best predictive models. Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, positive predictive value and accuracy were calculated for statistically significant predictive models. Main outcome measure Successful completion of the calibration study by the child. Results Only 42% of the subjects could use a VAS. The subject's age (≥ 5.6 years), combined with estimated IQ (≥ 100), was the best predictor of a child's ability to use a VAS (88% accuracy). Conclusion The majority of kindergarten children in our study could not complete a VAS accurately. Cognitive ability, combined with chronological age, was the best predictor of a child's accurate use of a VAS, as determined by logistic regression. Paediatric researchers may need to consider alternative rating scales to measure perceptions in children under 7 years of age.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Hosmer, D. W., & Lemeshow, S. (2000) · doi:10.1002/0471722146 · Cited by 20,302
Ohnhaus, E. E., & Adler, R. (1975) · Pain · doi:10.1016/0304-3959(75)90075-5 · Cited by 797
Cited by
Matza, L. S., Patrick, D. L., Riley, A. W., Alexander, J. J., Rajmil, L., Pleil, A. M., & Bullinger, M. (2013) · Value in Health · doi:10.1016/j.jval.2013.04.004 · Cited by 477
Validating the Fun Toolkit: an instrument for measuring children’s opinions of technology
Read, J. C. (2008) · Cognition, Technology & Work · doi:10.1007/s10111-007-0069-9 · Cited by 300
Measuring hunger and satiety in primary school children. Validation of a new picture rating scale
Bennett, C., & Blissett, J. (2014) · Appetite · doi:10.1016/j.appet.2014.03.011 · Cited by 72
Scheper, M. C., Nicholson, L. L., Adams, R. D., Tofts, L., & Pacey, V. (2017) · Rheumatology · doi:10.1093/rheumatology/kex148 · Cited by 68
Metadata
- Authors
- Shields, B. J., Palermo, T. M., Powers, J. D., Grewe, S. D., & Smith, G. A.
- Venue
- Child: Care, Health and Development
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2003-06-19
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 281-290
- ISSN
- 0305-1862 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2214
- OpenAlex
- W2138917813
- Cited by
- 193
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 4.35
- 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: Predictors of a child's ability to use a visual analogue scale. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2214.2003.00343.x
- The paper
- Shields, B. J., Palermo, T. M., Powers, J. D., Grewe, S. D., & Smith, G. A. (2003). Predictors of a child's ability to use a visual analogue scale. Child: Care, Health and Development. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2214.2003.00343.x
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.