ArticleDementia and geriatric cognitive disorders extra
Translation, Cross-Cultural Adaptation, and Validation of the Portuguese Version of the Rotterdam Elderly Pain Observation Scale.
Article in Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders extra. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study reports on the translation, cultural adaptation, and validation of a Portuguese version of the Rotterdam Elderly Pain Observation Scale (REPOS), a Dutch scale to assess pain in patients who cannot communicate, with or without dementia.
methodsThis is a multicenter study in pain and neurological units involving Brazil (clinical phase) and the Netherlands (training phase). We performed a retrospective cross-sectional, 2-staged analysis, translating and culturally adapting the REPOS to a Portuguese version (REPOS-P) and evaluating its psychometric properties. Eight health professionals were trained to observe patients with low back pain. REPOS consists of 10 behavioral items scored as present or absent after a 2-min observation. The REPOS score of ≥3 in combination with the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) of ≥4 indicated pain. The Content Validity Index (CVI) in all items and instructions showed CVI values at their maximum. According to the higher correlation coefficient found between NRS and REPOS-P, it may be suggested that there was an adequate convergent validity.
resultsThe REPOS-P was administered to 80 patients with a mean age of 60 years (SD 11.5). Cronbach's alpha coefficient showed a moderate internal consistency of REPOS-P (α = 0.62), which is compatible with the original study of REPOS. All health professionals reached high levels of interrater agreement within a median of 10 weeks of training, assuring reproducibility. Cohen's kappa was 0.96 (SD 0.03), and the intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.98 (SD 0.02), showing high reliability of REPOS-P scores between the trainer (researcher) and the trainees (healthcare professionals). The Pearson correlation coefficient was 0.95 (95% confidence interval 0.94-0.97), showing a significant correlation between the total scores of REPOS-P and NRS.
conclusionThe REPOS-P was a valuable scale for assessing elderly patients with low back pain by different healthcare professionals. Short application time, ease of use, clear instructions, and the brief training required for application were essential characteristics of REPOS-P.
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.