ArticleTurkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation2025
Underestimating Children's Self-reported Pain: Agree/Disagree?
Article in Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Combined Low-Level Laser and Ultrasound Therapy for Growing Pains in Children Aged Four to Twelve Years: A Pilot Study.Journal of biophotonics · 2026Trial
- Facial Expression-based Pain Detection: Development and Validation in the Post-anesthesia Care Unit.Anesthesiology and pain medicine · 2026Article
- Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Pediatric Anesthesia: A Structured Narrative Review.Cureus · 2026Review
- Pain catastrophizing and its associated factors in parents of children after polydactyly or syndactyly surgery: a cross-sectional survey.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare postoperative pain after different surgical types and grades using the visual analogue scale (VAS) and numeric rating scale (NRS) evaluated by the patient, parent, and nurse. Methods: After approval from the local ethics committee and written informed consent from the patient and parent, a single-center, prospective, randomized study was designed. A total of 180 children with American Society of Anesthesiologists I-III physical status between the ages of 7-12 (n = 90) and 13-18 (n = 90) years were included in the study who underwent elective surgery at Ankara University Faculty of Medicine Hospitals between January and December 2022. Pain was assessed postoperatively at 2 hours using two pain scales. Patients who underwent mini-intermediate or major surgery were evaluated separately. Results: Four children from each age group were excluded from the study due to insufficient data recording, and data from 172 children were analyzed. Including all age groups and surgical grades, all children had excellent agreement with the parent [VAS/NRS: intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)= 0.903/ICC= 0.900] and good agreement was found between the child and nurse (VAS/NRS: ICC= 0.852/ICC= 0.842). For the VAS and NRS, when parent and nurse compliance scores were compared, no significant difference was observed between the two scores. For VAS and NRS, fathers were found to be better at predicting pain for children than mothers. Conclusion: Self-reported pain is the gold standard for pain evaluation. The parents assessed pain scores that were similar to those of their children using NRS and VAS. Nurses underestimated a child's pain with both scores.
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.