ArticlePatient education and counseling2022
A direct observation of pain scale use in five video-recorded palliative care consultations: Using conversation analysis to show how practitioners support patients to describe pain.
Article in Patient education and counseling, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Interpretation inaccuracies in pain communication between Hmong patients and clinicians in the USA: A conversation analysis informed study.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2025Article
- "But when I come home…": How patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain account for their absent pain during naturally occurring clinical consultations.Qualitative research in medicine & healthcare · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveAssessing pain intensity is an important palliative care task. Self-report pain intensity scales are frequently used within assessment. In contrast to formal studies of validity and reliability, we examine administration of, and responses to these scales in everyday palliative care.
methodsWe searched episodes of pain scale use in a dataset of (video/audio-recorded) UK palliative care consultations involving five doctors, 37 terminally ill patients and their companions. We found five, and applied the techniques and tools of conversation analysis to characterise scales' administration and functioning.
resultsGenerally, the patients responded to scales by reporting multiple aspects of pain; the doctors supported and encouraged this. In two episodes, the scales generated misunderstandings. The doctors worked to resolve these in ways that avoided implying the patient was at fault.
conclusionPain intensity scales can yield richer information than just intensity. They can also generate misunderstandings and social friction which take skill and effort to resolve. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Patients tend to respond to pain intensity scales by reporting on multiple aspects of pain, professionals should support them in this. These scales sometimes generate misunderstandings. To preserve the therapeutic relationship, professionals should work to resolve these without implying the patient is to blame.
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.