ReviewCurrent opinion in anaesthesiology2008
Progress in pain assessment: the cognitively compromised patient.
Review in Current opinion in anaesthesiology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Identifying and Managing Pain in People with Alzheimer's Disease and Other Types of Dementia: A Systematic Review.CNS drugs · 2016Pooled it
- Facial Expressions as a Nexus for Health Assessment.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Chronic Pain in the Elderly with Cognitive Decline: A Narrative Review.Pain and therapy · 2019Review
- An international road map to improve pain assessment in people with impaired cognition: the development of the Pain Assessment in Impaired Cognition (PAIC) meta-tool.BMC neurology · 2014Article
- Pain management in patients with dementia.Clinical interventions in aging · 2013Review
- Improving the pharmacologic management of pain in older adults: identifying the research gaps and methods to address them.Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.) · 2011Article
- Long-term supplementation with an undenatured type-II collagen (UC-IIOpen veterinary journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purpose of reviewPain assessment is essential for patient care in many settings, but it proves difficult when the patient is cognitively compromised or otherwise unable to produce a conventional pain report. The present review describes the progress in pain assessment technology that involves the coding of human facial expression. RECENT
findingsIt is possible to quantify facial expression by coding patterns of facial muscle contraction and relaxation. These patterns are action units, and they can gauge the intensity of pain as well as signal its occurrence. The experience of pain seems to generate a unique facial expression comprising several action units. Concerns have existed about whether demented patients produce diagnostically meaningful facial expressions of pain because they tend to generate more nonspecific facial expressions and perhaps code pain intensity less well than normals. Recent work shows that facial expression reflects pain as well or better in demented patients compared with normals. SUMMARY: Although still nascent, coded facial expression appears to work reliably as a pain assessment tool with cognitively compromised patients. Clinical application awaits the development of technology that can automate facial coding and scoring.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.