ArticleAge and ageing2022
Interviewer effects in a survey examining pain intensity and pain interference in nursing home residents.
Article in Age and ageing, 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pain and Pain Management in Austrian Nursing Home Residents' Daily Lives: A Qualitative Study Guided by an Integrated Quality of Life Model for Older Adults.Nursing & health sciences · 2026Article
- Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFace-to-face surveys are applied frequently when conducting research in older populations. Interviewers play a decisive role in data quality, may affect measurement and influence results. This study uses survey data about pain in nursing home residents and analyses, whether affiliation-of-interviewer (internal vs. external to nursing home) and gender-of-interviewer affect residents' responses in terms of interviewer variance and systematically varying pain reports.
methodsOverall, 258 nursing home residents with up to moderate cognitive impairment were examined by 61 interviewers about pain intensity and interference applying the Brief Pain Inventory. Interviewer variance was measured using intra-interviewer correlation coefficients (ρ). Two-factorial covariance analysis was applied to analyse whether pain intensity and interference scores differ by interviewer characteristics.
resultsInterviewer heterogeneity accounts for almost one quarter of total variance on average. Interviewer variance is higher for internal and male interviewers than for external and female interviewers. Covariance analyses show significant effects of interviewer characteristics on pain reports. Average pain intensity and interference scores vary considerably by interviewer gender and affiliation. Highest pain intensity was reported towards female internal and male external interviewers; highest pain interference was reported towards male external interviewers.
conclusionResidents' answers substantially differ in relation to who is assessing pain. There is a risk of imprecise and biased survey estimates on sensitive topics like pain in nursing homes. Interviewer gender and affiliation seem to evoke gender-specific and status-related expectations and attributions which influence residents' response process. Interviewer effects pose a considerable threat to survey data quality in institutionalised older populations.
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.