ArticleBrain sciences2021
Faces of Pain during Dental Procedures: Reliability of Scoring Facial Expressions in Print Art.
Article in Brain sciences, 2021. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Towards a Better Understanding on How Cognitive Impairment Affects Pain.Brain sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundObservational tools have been developed to assess pain in cognitively impaired individuals. It is not known, however, whether these tools are universal enough so that even pain depicted in print art can be assessed reliably. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the reliability in scoring facial expressions of pain in dental print art from the 17th, 18th, and 19th century, using a Short Form of the 15-item Pain Assessment in Impaired Cognition (PAIC15-SF) tool.
methodsSeventeen prints of patients undergoing dental procedures were scored twice by two inexperienced observers and an expert and once by a Gold Standard observer.
resultsAll observers achieved high intra-observer reliability for all four items of the category "facial expressions" and for three items of the category "body movements" (ICC: 0.748-0.991). The remaining two items of the category "body movements", viz., "rubbing" and "restlessness", were excluded from further research because it was not possible to calculate a reliable ICC. Overall, the intra-observer reliability of the expert was higher than that of the inexperienced observers. The inter-observer reliability scores varied from poor to excellent (ICC: 0.000-0.970). In comparison to the Gold Standard, the inter-observer reliability of the expert was higher than that of the inexperienced observers.
conclusionThe PAIC15-SF tool is universal enough even to allow reliable assessment of facial expressions of pain depicted in dental print art.
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.