Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40900752›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2025

Racialized bias in pediatric pain: the role of observers' attentional processing and estimations of children's pain.

Ama Kissi, Dimitri Van Ryckeghem, Peter Mende-Siedlecki, Adam Hirsh, Ischa Van Alboom, Dries Debeer, Tine Vervoort

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Ama KissiDepartment of Experimental-Clinical and Health Psychology, Ghent University, Ghent, Flanders, Belgium.
Dimitri Van RyckeghemDepartment of Experimental-Clinical and Health Psychology, Ghent University, Ghent, Flanders, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-4981-8896
Peter Mende-SiedleckiDepartment of Psychological & Brain Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark, United States.
Adam HirshDepartment of Psychology, Indiana University-Purdue University at Indianapolis, West Lafayette, United States.
Ischa Van AlboomDepartment of Experimental-Clinical and Health Psychology, Ghent University, Ghent, Flanders, Belgium.
Dries DebeerDepartment of Experimental Psychology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-5875-357X
Tine VervoortDepartment of Experimental-Clinical and Health Psychology, Ghent University, Ghent, Flanders, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Research demonstrates racism in pediatric pain care. However, the mechanisms underlying these injustices are not well understood. This study examined White observers' attentional processing of facial expressions of pain demonstrated by White Method: Eighty White adults (42 women; 38 men) performed the visual search task (VST), rated the levels of pain that the children expressed, and reported their beliefs concerning the pain experience of White Results: Findings revealed facilitated attentional engagement towards Black compared to White child pain faces, particularly at high pain expressiveness levels. No attentional disengagement effects were observed. Pain estimations increased with increasing pain expressiveness but, contrary to prior findings, did not differ for White Conclusions: The results underscore the importance of understanding how racialized disparities in observers' attentional processing of others' pain may contribute to racialized inequities in pediatric pain care.

Indexed as

AttentionBlack PeoplePainRacismWhite PeopleAdolescentAdultChildFacial ExpressionFemaleHumansMalePain MeasurementYoung AdultAttentionChildrenObserverPainPain estimationsRacialized bias

Identifiers

PMID40900752
PMCPMC12401021

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.