Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28556311›Full record

ReviewActa paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992)2017

Defining pain in newborns: need for a uniform taxonomy?

Kanwaljeet J S Anand

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Acta paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. [Evidence-based guideline for neonatal pain management in China (2023)].Zhongguo dang dai er ke za zhi = Chinese journal of contemporary pediatrics · 2023
    Guideline
  2. Validation and reliability of a scale for prolonged pain assessment in Brazilian neonates.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. COMFORTneo scale: a reliable and valid instrument to measure prolonged pain in neonates?Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2023
    Observational
  8. Article
  9. Biopsychosocial approach to tendinopathy.BMJ open sport & exercise medicine · 2022
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Practical approaches to sedation and analgesia in the newborn.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2021
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Kanwaljeet J S AnandDepartment of Pediatrics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6498-1483

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A framework for defining pain terms such as acute, persistent, prolonged or chronic pain to newborns was derived from the scientific literature on neonatal pain assessments, previous attempts to define chronic pain and the clinical and neurophysiological features of neonatal pain. This novel framework incorporates the temporal features, localising characteristics, and secondary effects of the pain experienced, as well as the behavioural and physiological response patterns of newborns.

conclusionAlthough not evidence-based, this framework provides an initial starting point for defining commonly used neonatal pain terms. It will require future revision/refinement based on the accumulating evidence for non-acute pain.

Indexed as

Infant, NewbornPain MeasurementHumansTerminology as TopicChronic painPain assessmentPain in neonatePersistent painProlonged pain

Identifiers

PMID28556311
PMCPMC5601230

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.