ArticleJournal of feline medicine and surgery2026
Challenges using the Feline Grimace Scale in brachycephalic cats with ocular pain.
Article in Journal of feline medicine and surgery, 2026. 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.
- Pain and pain management in cats: an ever-evolving field.Journal of feline medicine and surgery · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
ObjectivesThis study investigated the inter-rater reliability, agreement and responsiveness of the Feline Grimace Scale (FGS) in brachycephalic cats.MethodsA total of 28 brachycephalic cats (mean age 6.6 ± 4.4 years, mean weight 4.2 ± 1.0 kg) undergoing ocular surgery were included in a prospective, randomised, blinded study. Cats presenting fear-anxiety behaviours were not enrolled. In total, 95 images of these cats were collected from video recordings pre- and postoperatively (before/after analgesia), scored by four raters using the FGS and compared with real-time scores. Limits of agreement (LoAs) and bias were evaluated using the Bland-Altman method (good or poor agreement if bias <0.1 or >0.1, respectively). Inter-rater reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC; <0.50 = poor, 0.50-0.75 = moderate, 0.76-0.90 = good and >0.90 = excellent reliability). Generalised linear mixed models evaluated responsiveness (
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.