ArticleScientific reports2023
Reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the Ocular pain assessment survey (OPAS-J).
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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 citations in OpenAlex.
- Validation of the Ocular Pain Assessment Survey Instrument With Rasch Analysis.Translational vision science & technology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to determine the reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the Ocular Pain Assessment Survey (OPAS-J) to measure ocular pain and quality of life. A multi-institutional cross-sectional study was conducted on participants with and without ocular pain. The Wong-Baker FACES® Pain Rating Scale served as the gold standard for measuring the intensity of ocular pain. Sixty-four participants who visited two clinics located in Japan between May 2019 and October 2019 were included in the study. The OPAS was translated and culturally adapted to Japanese. The internal consistency of the OPAS-J was assessed using Cronbach's alpha coefficient. Twenty-four (37.5%) and 40 (62.5%) participants were classified as having ocular pain and no ocular pain, respectively. All dimensions of the OPAS-J had good reliability, with a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.870 for ocular pain intensity over the past 24 h and 0.874, 0.899, 0.874, 0.871, and 0.876 for ocular pain intensity over the past 2 weeks, non-ocular pain, interference with quality of life, aggravating factors, and associated factors, respectively. The OPAS-J is a reliable and responsive tool that can be used to quantify ocular pain intensity.
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.