ArticleKorean journal of anesthesiology2016
Development of the Geop-Pain questionnaire for multidisciplinary assessment of pain sensitivity.
Article in Korean journal of anesthesiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predictive Value of the Phase Angle for Analgesic Efficacy in Lumbosacral Transforaminal Block.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Statistical data presentation.Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo assess the multidisciplinary aspects of pain, various self-rating questionnaires have been developed, but there have not been sufficient relevant studies on this topic in South Korea. The aim of this study was to develop a new pain sensitivity-related questionnaire in the Korean language that would be simple and would well reflect Koreans' senses.
methodsA new pain assessment questionnaire was developed through a pre-survey on "geop", which is the Korean word expressing fear, anxiety, or catastrophizing. We named the new assessment questionnaire the Geop-Pain Questionnaire (GPQ). The GPQ was composed of 15 items divided into three categories and rated on a 5-point scale. As a preliminary study, internal consistency and test-retest reliability analyses were conducted. Subsequently, 109 individuals completed the GPQ along with three pain-related questionnaires translated into Korean (Pain Sensitivity Questionnaire [PSQ], Pain Anxiety Symptoms Scale [PASS], and Pain Catastrophizing Scale [PCS]), and the correlations were analyzed.
resultsAll items in the GPQ showed appropriate internal consistency, and the test-retest reliability analysis showed no statistically significant differences. The correlations between the GPQ and the existing questionnaires revealed that the GPQ scores had mid-positive correlations with the PSQ scores and strong positive correlations with the PASS and PCS scores.
conclusionsThis study attempted to develop a questionnaire assessing pain sensitivity multidimensionally using the Korean word geop for the first time. The self-rating GPQ showed high correlations with the existing questionnaires and demonstrated potential to be utilized as a pain prediction index in clinical practice.
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.