ArticleBMC veterinary research2022
Bristol Rabbit Pain Scale (BRPS): clinical utility, validity and reliability.
Article in BMC veterinary research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ameliorative role of silver nanoparticles incorporated with chitosan solution and leukocyte platelet-rich fibrin scaffold during colon anastomosis in rabbits.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2025Article
- Comparing the efficacy and safety of cryoablation and microwave ablation in treating paravertebral metastases of rabbit VX2 tumor.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Prosthetic Joint Infection Research Models in NZW Rabbits: Opportunities for Standardization-A Systematic Review.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2024Review
- Pharmacokinetics of Extended-release Buprenorphine and Clinical Efficacy for Postoperative Pain Management in the Domestic Ferret (Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2024Article
- Comparison between Carprofen and Meloxicam for Post-Neutering Pain Management in Pet Rabbits.Veterinary sciences · 2024Article
- Evaluating the Efficacy of a Peripheral Nerve Simulator-Guided Brachial Plexus Block in Rabbits Undergoing Orthopaedic Surgery Compared to Systemic Analgesia.Veterinary sciences · 2024Article
- An investigation into how accurately UK rabbit owners identify pain in their pet rabbits.BMC veterinary research · 2024Article
- Deep learning for video-based automated pain recognition in rabbits.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- The impact of stress and anesthesia on animal models of infectious disease.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2023Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Bristol Rabbit Pain Scale (BRPS) was developed using a combination of methods, focus groups and behavioural observation, that led to a composite pain scale of six categories (Demeanour, Locomotion, Posture, Ears, Eyes and Grooming) with four intensities of pain (0, 1, 2, and 3), and a total score of 0-18. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical utility, validity and reliability of the BRPS. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe clinical utility of the BRPS was tested using a questionnaire composed of ten questions each on a five-point Likert scale ranging from one (strongly disagree) to five (strongly agree). The respondents, (veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses), were asked to assess up to four rabbits in acute pain, using the novel pain. They then completed the questionnaire which asked whether the BRPS was easy and quick to use and whether it provided information that was clinically useful. The questionnaire was tested for internal reliability using the Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficient. The construct validity (how well the tool measures the concept it was designed for) was measured by observers blindly rating 20 rabbits pre- and post-surgery whilst the criterion validity (the degree to which the tool correlates with a gold standard) was assessed by correlating BRPS scores with scores using a numerical rating scale (NRS) with a total score of 0-10. Inter-rater reliability was tested by quantifying the agreement in the pain scores given by nine participants when assessing the same 40 video clips. The intra-rater reliability was measured by testing how consistent the participants were when rating the same clips one month later.
resultsThe median score of the ten questions of the clinical utility test was 4 (range 2-5). The Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficient of the clinical utility test was good (α = 0.811) demonstrating good internal consistency. The median (range) pain score of the BRPS and the NRS were 3 (0-14) and 0 (0-8) before surgery and 12 (1-18) and 7 (0-10) after surgery respectively. The BRPS demonstrated high construct validity (Z = -11.452; p < 0.001) and there was a strong correlation between the BRPS and the NRS (Rho = 0.851; p < 0.001) indicating high criterion validity. The inter-rater and the intra-rater agreements were α = 0.863 and α = 0.861 respectively, which is considered good.
conclusionsThis study showed that the BRPS is a suitable tool for quantifying pain in rabbits in a clinically useful, valid and reliable way.
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.