ArticlePloS one2020
Reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the Paediatric Pain Profile for children with severe motor and intellectual disabilities.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Children with severe motor and intellectual disabilities experience chronic pain but cannot communicate verbally. However, no Japanese tool currently exists for assessing pain in this population. This study aimed to develop and evaluate the reliability and validity of a Japanese version of the Paediatric Pain Profile, which is a behavioral rating scale to assess pain in children with severe neurological disabilities. The sample comprised 30 children with severe motor and intellectual disabilities at three hospitals in Japan. Three specialist nurses rated low and high pain video scenes of the children (twice at 1-week intervals) using the Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability behavioral scale and a translated Japanese version of the Paediatric Pain Profile. On the basis of their ratings, we calculated the internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and intra- and inter-observer reliabilities of the Paediatric Pain Profile. Additionally, we assessed concurrent validity using the Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability behavioral scale and construct validity using low versus high pain scenes. Both internal consistency (low pain: alpha = 0.735; high pain: alpha = 0.928) and test-retest reliability (r = 0.846) of the Japanese version of the Paediatric Pain Profile were good. Intra-observer reliability was substantial (r = 0.748), whereas inter-observer reliability was only moderate (r = 0.529). However, the concurrent validity with Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability scores was good (r = 0.629) and construct validity was confirmed (p < 0.001). We confirmed the validity of the Japanese version of the Paediatric Pain Profile, but reliable pain assessment may require repeated ratings by the same person. To accurately assess pain in children with severe motor and intellectual disabilities, healthcare staff must be properly trained and become more skilled in using the Japanese version of the Paediatric Pain Profile.
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.