The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Does the Clinically Significant Difference in Visual Analog Scale Pain Scores Vary with Gender, Age, or Cause of Pain?
Open accessAbstract
Abstract. Objectives: To determine the minimum clinically significant difference in visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores for acute pain in the ED setting and to determine whether this difference varies with gender, age, or cause of pain. Methods: A prospective, descriptive study of 152 adult patients presenting to the ED with acute pain. At presentation and at 20‐minute intervals to a maximum of three measurements, patients marked the level of their pain on a 100‐mm, nonhatched VAS. At each follow‐up they also gave a verbal rating of their pain as “a lot better,”“much the same,”“a little worse,” or “much worse.” The minimum clinically significant difference in VAS pain scores was defined as the mean difference between current and preceding scores when pain was reported as a little worse or a little better. Data were compared based on gender, age more than or less than 50 years, and traumatic vs nontraumatic causes of pain. Results: The minimum clinically significant difference in VAS pain scores is 9 mm (95% CI, 6 to 13 mm). There is no statistically significant difference between the minimum clinically significant differences in VAS pain scores based on gender (p = 0.172), age (p = 0.782), or cause of pain (p = 0.84). Conclusions: The minimum clinically significant difference in VAS pain scores was found to be 9 mm. Differences of less than this amount, even if statistically significant, are unlikely to be of clinical significance. No significant difference in minimum significant VAS scores was found between gender, age, and cause‐of‐pain groups.
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
Cited by
Dworkin, R. H., Turk, D. C., Wyrwich, K. W., Beaton, D., Cleeland, C. S., Farrar, J. T., Haythornthwaite, J. A., Jensen, M. P., Kerns, R. D., Ader, D. N., et al. (2008) · The Journal of Pain · doi:10.1016/j.jpain.2007.09.005 · Cited by 3,471
Kelly, A.-M. (2001) · Emergency Medicine Journal · doi:10.1136/emj.18.3.205 · Cited by 969
Self-citationBijur, P. E., Latimer, C. T., & Gallagher, E. J. (2003) · Academic Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1111/j.1553-2712.2003.tb01355.x · Cited by 933
Hides, J., Stanton, W., Mcmahon, S., Sims, K., & Richardson, C. (2008) · Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy · doi:10.2519/jospt.2008.2658 · Cited by 334
Holdgate, A., Asha, S., Craig, J., & Thompson, J. (2003) · Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1046/j.1442-2026.2003.00499.x · Cited by 275
Metadata
- Authors
- Kelly, A.
- Venue
- Academic Emergency Medicine
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1998-11
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1086-1090
- ISSN
- 1069-6563 (ISSN-L)
- 1553-2712
- OpenAlex
- W2000695086
- Cited by
- 626
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.88
- 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: Does the Clinically Significant Difference in Visual Analog Scale Pain Scores Vary with Gender, Age, or Cause of Pain? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1553-2712.1998.tb02667.x
- The paper
- Kelly, A. (1998). Does the Clinically Significant Difference in Visual Analog Scale Pain Scores Vary with Gender, Age, or Cause of Pain? Academic Emergency Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1553-2712.1998.tb02667.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.