Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34012496›Full record

ArticlePain research & management2021

Cross Cultural Adaptation and Validation of Italian Version of the Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs Scale and Pain DETECT Questionnaire for the Distinction between Nociceptive and Neuropathic Pain.

Alberto Migliore, Gianfranco Gigliucci, Antimo Moretti, Alessio Pietrella, Marco Peresson, Fabiola Atzeni, Piercarlo Sarzi-Puttini, Laura Bazzichi, Sara Liguori, Giovanni Iolascon

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Pain research & management, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Pain and Motor Function in Myotonic Dystrophy Type 1: A Cross-Sectional Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
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.

Alberto MiglioreRheumatology Unit, San Pietro Fatebenefratelli Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Gianfranco GigliucciRheumatology Unit, San Pietro Fatebenefratelli Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Antimo MorettiDepartment of Medical and Surgical Specialties and Dentistry, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-4598-2891
Alessio PietrellaNeurological Section, San Pietro Fatebenefratelli Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Marco PeressonNeurological Section, San Pietro Fatebenefratelli Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Fabiola AtzeniRheumatology Unit, University of Messina, Messina, Italy.
Piercarlo Sarzi-PuttiniRheumatology Unit, ASST-Fatebenefratelli-L. Sacco University Hospital, Milan, Italy.
Laura BazzichiRheumatology Unit, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
Sara LiguoriDepartment of Medical and Surgical Specialties and Dentistry, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-8707-2482
Giovanni IolasconDepartment of Medical and Surgical Specialties and Dentistry, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to validate Italian versions of Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (LANSS) scale and Pain DETECT questionnaire (PD-Q) and evaluate the ability of these questionnaires to discriminate between nociceptive and neuropathic pain. Design: Multicenter prospective validation cohort study. Methods: The Italian versions of both questionnaires according to Italian cultural characteristics were performed according to the following steps: (1) translation of the questionnaires from English into Italian; (2) review by a bilingual individual for consistency; (3) proposed version after a mail round between experts; (4) backward translation; (5) comparison with the original English version by the experts; (6) approved version of the questionnaires. One hundred patients were enrolled and completed the two questionnaires administered by a specialist or blinded nursing staff, at the baseline and after 24/48 hours. Internal consistency, stability, validity, and discriminative power were analyzed. Results: Statistically significant differences were reported about the ability of both questionnaires to discriminate between patients affected by neuropathic or nociceptive pain. Internal consistency for the Italian version of the LANSS was 0.76, and for PD-Q, it was 0.80, assessed by Cronbach's Conclusions: This study validated the Italian versions of LANSS and PD-Q as reliable instruments with good psychometric characteristics, for pain evaluation, discriminating between nociceptive and neuropathic pain. Our findings were similar to those observed in the original study. Furthermore, we have reported the test-retest reliability for both questionnaires, not addressed in original validation studies.

Indexed as

Cross-Cultural ComparisonAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansItalyMaleMiddle AgedNeuralgiaNociceptive PainPain MeasurementProspective StudiesSurveys and QuestionnairesTranslationsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID34012496
PMCPMC8102124

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.