Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30238085›Full record

ReviewJournal of patient-reported outcomes2017

Response scale selection in adult pain measures: results from a literature review.

Shima Safikhani, Katharine S Gries, Jeremiah J Trudeau, David Reasner, Katja Rüdell, Stephen Joel Coons, Elizabeth Nicole Bush, Jennifer Hanlon, Lucy Abraham, Margaret Vernon

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 78 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
78citing 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.

NCT05899088 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

A Randomized Clinical Trial of Mindful Movement for Patients With Chronic Pelvic

TypeinterventionalSponsorThe Miriam HospitalRan2023 to 2024Enrolled60ConditionsPelvic Pain, EndometriosisArmsMindful Movement
NCT06030297 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Diode Laser as a Biomarker for Neuropathic Pain of Peripheral Origin.

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of UtahRan2023 to 2026Enrolled75ConditionsPeripheral NeuropathyArmsDiode Laser fiber type Selective Stimulator, ZTlido 1.8 % Topical System, PeriCam PSI NR, Medoc Quantitative Sensory Testing, Inactive Topical System
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Detecting Feigned Pain Using an Eye-Tracker Integrated Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS).Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain · 2025
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

18 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

10 authors.

Shima Safikhani1Evidera, 7101 Wisconsin Ave., Suite 1400, Bethesda, MD 20814 USA.
Katharine S Gries2Janssen Global Services LLC, 700 Route US 202, Raritan, NJ 08869 USA.
Jeremiah J Trudeau2Janssen Global Services LLC, 700 Route US 202, Raritan, NJ 08869 USA.
David Reasner3Ironwood Pharmaceuticals, 301 Binney Street, Cambridge, MA 02142 USA.
Katja Rüdell4Pfizer LTD, Outcomes & Evidence, Global Health & Value, Pfizer Ltd, Tadworth, Surrey UK.
Stephen Joel Coons5Patient-Reported Outcome Consortium, Critical Path Institute, 1730 E River Rd, Tucson, AZ 85718 USA.
Elizabeth Nicole Bush6Global Patient Outcomes and Real World Evidence, Eli Lilly and Company, Lilly Corporate Center, Indianapolis, IN 46285 USA.
Jennifer Hanlon3Ironwood Pharmaceuticals, 301 Binney Street, Cambridge, MA 02142 USA.
Lucy Abraham4Pfizer LTD, Outcomes & Evidence, Global Health & Value, Pfizer Ltd, Tadworth, Surrey UK.
Margaret Vernon1Evidera, 7101 Wisconsin Ave., Suite 1400, Bethesda, MD 20814 USA.

Funding

Critical Path to Public Private PartnershipsU18FD005320 · FDA · CRITICAL PATH INSTITUTE · PI Klaus Romero · 2014 to 2026
$127.1M
FDA HHS U18 FD005320
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe purpose of this literature review was to examine the existing patient-reported outcome measurement literature to understand the empirical evidence supporting response scale selection in pain measurement for the adult population.

methodsThe search strategy involved a comprehensive, structured, literature review with multiple search objectives and search terms.

resultsThe searched yielded 6918 abstracts which were reviewed against study criteria for eligibility across the adult pain objective. The review included 42 review articles, consensus guidelines, expert opinion pieces, and primary research articles providing insights into optimal response scale selection for pain assessment in the adult population. Based on the extensive and varied literature on pain assessments, the adult pain studies typically use simple response scales with single-item measures of pain-a numeric rating scale, visual analog scale, or verbal rating scale. Across 42 review articles, consensus guidelines, expert opinion pieces, and primary research articles, the NRS response scale was most often recommended in these guidance documents. When reviewing the empirical basis for these recommendations, we found that the NRS had slightly superior measurement properties (e.g., reliability, validity, responsiveness) across a wide variety of contexts of use as compared to other response scales.

conclusionsBoth empirical studies and review articles provide evidence that the 11-point NRS is likely the optimal response scale to evaluate pain among adult patients without cognitive impairment.

Indexed as

Outcome measurementPainRating scalesResponse optionsResponse scales

Identifiers

PMID30238085
PMCPMC6127068

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.