Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 161

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evaluation of 21-Numbered Circle and 10-Centimeter Horizontal Line Visual Analog Scales for Physician and Parent Subjective Ratings in Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis

Open access
FILOCAMO, GIOVANNI, DAVÌ, SERGIO, PISTORIO, ANGELA, BERTAMINO, MARTA, RUPERTO, NICOLINO, LATTANZI, BIANCA, CONSOLARO, ALESSANDRO, MAGNI-MANZONI, SILVIA, GALASSO, ROBERTA, VARNIER, GIULIA CAMILLA, MARTINI, ALBERTO, RAVELLI, ANGELO·2010·The Journal of Rheumatology

Abstract

Objective.: To evaluate the measurement properties of 21-numbered circle visual analog scales (VAS) and traditional 10-cm horizontal line VAS for physician and parent subjective ratings in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). Methods.: We studied 2 patient samples in whom physician global rating of overall disease activity, parent global rating of the child’s overall well-being, and parent rating of intensity of child’s pain were performed using traditional 10-cm horizontal line VAS (n = 397) or 21-numbered circle VAS (n = 471). The measurement performances of the 2 VAS formats were examined by assessing construct validity, score distribution, responsiveness to change over time, and minimal clinically important difference (MCID). Results.: Most Spearman correlations with other JIA outcome measures yielded by 21-numbered circle VAS were greater than those obtained with 10-cm horizontal line VAS, revealing that the circle VAS format has better construct validity. Ceiling effects (i.e., score = 0) for physician and parent global ratings were 43.7% and 32.9%, respectively, on 21-numbered circle VAS, and 31.6% and 35.3%, respectively, on 10-cm horizontal line VAS. Responsiveness of 21-numbered circle VAS was good (standardized response mean > 0.8) or moderate (standardized response mean > 0.6) among patients classified as improved or worsened, respectively, by the physician or the parent. Overall, MCID values for 21-numbered circle VAS tended to be greater for worsening than for improvement. Conclusion.: The 21-numbered circle VAS are a suitable alternative to the 10-cm horizontal line VAS and may facilitate incorporation of physician and parent subjective ratings in standard clinical practice.

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 · 10.3899/jrheum.091474

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

See all 161

Metadata

Authors
FILOCAMO, G., DAVÌ, S., PISTORIO, A., BERTAMINO, M., RUPERTO, N., LATTANZI, B., CONSOLARO, A., MAGNI-MANZONI, S., GALASSO, R., VARNIER, G. C., MARTINI, A., & RAVELLI, A.
Venue
The Journal of Rheumatology
Published
2010-06-15
Volume
37
Issue
7
Pages
1534-1541
ISSN
  • 0315-162X (ISSN-L)
  • 1499-2752
OpenAlex
W2080685621
Cited by
161
References
1
FWCI
3.23
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: Evaluation of 21-Numbered Circle and 10-Centimeter Horizontal Line Visual Analog Scales for Physician and Parent Subjective Ratings in Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3899/jrheum.091474
The paper
FILOCAMO, G., DAVÌ, S., PISTORIO, A., BERTAMINO, M., RUPERTO, N., LATTANZI, B., CONSOLARO, A., MAGNI-MANZONI, S., GALASSO, R., VARNIER, G. C., MARTINI, A., & RAVELLI, A. (2010). Evaluation of 21-Numbered Circle and 10-Centimeter Horizontal Line Visual Analog Scales for Physician and Parent Subjective Ratings in Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis. The Journal of Rheumatology. https://doi.org/10.3899/jrheum.091474

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.