ArticlePeerJ2020
Instrumental validity and intra/inter-rater reliability of a novel low-cost digital pressure algometer.
Article in PeerJ, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artepillin C-rich propolis extract supplementation promotes muscle recovery following exercise-induced muscle damage in resistance-trained young females: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial.Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · 2025Trial
- Effectiveness of a Flossing Protocol and Manual Therapy in Improving the Clinical and Functional Status of Subjects with Recurrent Ankle Sprains; A Double-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Trial
- Validity, Reliability, and Responsiveness of a New Device for Measuring Pressure Pain Thresholds.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Transfer of Energy Capacitive and Resistive Therapy Versus Dry Needling for Active Upper Trapezius Myofascial Trigger Points: Effects on Pain and Cervical Range of Motion a Randomized Controlled Trial.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- High Cardiorespiratory Fitness and Vigorous Physical Activity Relate to Select Pain Sensitivity Assessments in Healthy Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study.Pain research & management · 2026Article
- Article
- Reliability of the use of foot pressure pain threshold in adults: a test-retest analysis.PeerJ · 2025Article
- Article
- Effectiveness of Shoe Rotation in Managing Plantar Fasciitis in Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Intra-rater and Inter-rater Reliability of the Commander Pressure Algometer in Greek Patients With Chronic Neck Pain.Cureus · 2024Article
- Article
- Personalized checkpoint acupuncture can reduce postoperative pain after abdominal surgery-a STRICTA-conform pilot study.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Article
- Article
- Masticatory Myoelectric Side Modular Ratio Asymmetry during Maximal Biting in Women with and without Temporomandibular Disorders.Biosensors · 2022Article
- Effect of stress on contextual pain sensitivity in the preoperative period- A proof of concept study.Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPain assessment is a key measure that accompanies treatments in a wide range of clinical settings. A low-cost valid and reliable pressure algometer would allow objective assessment of pressure pain to assist a variety of health professionals. However, the pressure algometer is often expensive, which limits its daily use in both clinical and research settings.
objectivesThis study aimed to assess the instrumental validity, and the intra- and inter-rater reliability of an inexpensive digital adapted pressure algometer.
methodsA single rater applied 60 random compressions on a force platform. The pressure pain thresholds of 20 volunteers were collected twice (3 days apart) by two raters. The main outcome measurements were as follows: the maximal peak force (in kPa) and the pressure pain threshold (adapted pressure algometer vs. force platform). Cronbach's α test was used to assess internal consistency. The standard error of measurement provided estimates of measurement error, and the measurement bias was estimated with the Bland-Altman method, with lower and upper limits of agreement.
resultsNo differences were observed when comparing the compression results (
conclusionThe adapted pressure algometer provide valid and reliable measurements of pressure pain threshold. The results support more widespread use of the pressure pain threshold method among clinicians.
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.