ArticlePaediatrics & child health2021
An assessment of the psychometric properties of the Stoplight Pain Scale in a Canadian paediatric emergency department.
Article in Paediatrics & child health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to validate a novel, three faced, colour-coded, action-oriented tool: The Stoplight Pain Scale (SPS).
methodsA prospective observational cohort study was conducted at a Canadian paediatric emergency department from November 2014 to February 2017. Patients aged 3 to 12 years and their caregivers were asked to rate pain using the SPS and the Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R). Pain was measured just before analgesia administration, 30 minutes after analgesia administration, and immediately following a painful procedure.
resultsA total of 227 patients were included; 26.9% (61/227) were 3 to 5 years old while 73.1% (166/227) were 6 to 12 years old. Using Cohen's κ, agreement for SPS and FPS-R was 'fair' for children (0.28 [95% confidence interval {CI} 0.20 to 0.36]) and 'poor' for caregivers (0.14 [95% CI 0.07 to 0.21]), at initial measurement. The SPS had 'fair' agreement between child and caregiver scores, (0.37 [95% CI 0.27 to 0.47]), compared to FPS-R which showed 'poor' agreement (0.20 [95% CI 0.12 to 0.29]). Absolute agreement between child and caregiver SPS scores improved with repeat exposure; 30 minutes after analgesia administration, caregivers and children had fair agreement (κ=0.38, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.48); they had moderate agreement directly following painful procedures (κ=0.46, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.59). Overall, 72.4% (139/192) of children and 60.2% (118/196) of caregivers preferred SPS over FPS-R.
conclusionThe SPS demonstrates fair agreement with FPS-R for children and fair-moderate agreement between children and caregivers; agreement improved with repeat use. The SPS is simple and easy to use; it may have a role in empowering direct child and family involvement in pain management.
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.