ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
Evaluating pain outcomes in Chinese ophthalmology patients using the APS-POQ-R-C: a Rasch analysis.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Revised American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire (APS-POQ-R-C) using Rasch analysis, to optimize the APS-POQ-R-C for effective pain assessment in Chinese postoperative ophthalmic patients. Methods: The polytomous analysis approach of the Rasch model was used to comprehensively evaluate the applicability of the APS-POQ-R-C scale in postoperative ophthalmic patients. Using a sample of 294 valid questionnaires, multiple aspects of the scale were tested, including unidimensionality, local independence of items, reliability and separation, item fit, person-item mapping, test information function, and differential item functioning (DIF) analysis. Results: Principal component analysis of residuals, explained common variance (0.61) and omega hierarchical (0.72) of the APS-POQ-R-C scale demonstrates essential unidimensionality. The reliability and separation of person were 0.93 and 3.64, item were 0.99 and 10.32, indicating high reliability and separation. The standardized residual correlations between items were all below 0.7, suggesting local independence. The response category functioning results recommended merging categories 8, 9, and 10. Except for item P10, most items had infit and outfit mean square (MNSQ) values within acceptable ranges, indicating good fit to the Rasch model. Item P10's MNSQ values exceeded 1.50. The person-item map indicating that item difficulty was generally higher than the mean ability of the population. The test information curve showed that the scale was most informative for individuals with higher levels of the latent traits. DIF analysis revealed slight gender-related differential functioning in items P5a, P5b, P5c, and P5d, with absolute DIF contrast greater than 0.5. Conclusion: The APS-POQ-R-C can be used to assess postoperative pain management effectively in the study sample, with overall good psychometric properties. Further optimization is suggested, including reducing item redundancy, incorporating more simple items and considering the potential influence of gender differences on responses to the scale.
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.