Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 457

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Visual Analog Scale for Pain: Clinical Significance in Postoperative Patients

Open access
Bodian, Carol A., Freedman, Gordon, Hossain, Sabera, Eisenkraft, James B., Beilin, Yaakov·2001·Anesthesiology

Abstract

Background: The visual analog scale is widely used in research studies, but its connection with clinical experience outside the research setting and the best way to administer the VAS forms are not well established. This study defines changes in dosing of intravenous patient-controlled analgesia as a clinically relevant outcome and compares it with VAS measures of postoperative pain. Methods: Visual analog scale measurements were obtained from 150 patients on the morning after intraabdominal surgery. On the same afternoon, 50 of the patients provided a VAS score on the same form used in the morning, 50 on a new form, and 50 were not asked for a second VAS measurement. Results: Visual analog scale values and changes in value were similar for patients who were given a new VAS form in the afternoon and those who used the form that showed the morning value. The proportions of patients requesting additional analgesia were 4, 43, and 80%, corresponding to afternoon VAS scores of 30 or less, 31-70, and greater than 70, respectively. Change from morning VAS score had no apparent influence on patient-controlled analgesic dosing for patients with afternoon values of 30 or less or greater than 70, but changes in VAS scores of at least 10 did discriminate among patients whose afternoon values were between 31 and 70. Conclusions: When pain is an outcome measure in research studies, grouping final VAS scores into a small number of categories provides greater clinical relevance for comparisons than using the full spectrum of measured values or changes in value. Seeing an earlier VAS form has no apparent influence on later values.

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 · 10.1097/00000542-200112000-00013

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 457

Metadata

Authors
Bodian, C. A., Freedman, G., Hossain, S., Eisenkraft, J. B., & Beilin, Y.
Venue
Anesthesiology
Published
2001-12-01
Volume
95
Issue
6
Pages
1356-1361
ISSN
0003-3022 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2035691448
Cited by
457
References
0
FWCI
7.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: The Visual Analog Scale for Pain: Clinical Significance in Postoperative Patients. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/00000542-200112000-00013
The paper
Bodian, C. A., Freedman, G., Hossain, S., Eisenkraft, J. B., & Beilin, Y. (2001). The Visual Analog Scale for Pain: Clinical Significance in Postoperative Patients. Anesthesiology. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000542-200112000-00013

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.