ArticleBritish journal of pain2026
Reliability and standard error of measurement of pressure pain thresholds at articular landmarks.
Article in British journal of pain, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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: Pressure pain threshold (PPT) testing is a widely used quantitative sensory testing method to assess mechanical pain sensitivity. While reference values for PPT at articular-/joint-related and osseous landmarks are available, data on measurement reliability remain limited. This study aimed to determine the intra- and inter-rater reliability of PPT measurements and to report the standard error of measurement (SEM) for joint PPT. Methods: Healthy participants aged 18-40 years were included in a two-part study. In Part A ( Results: Intra-rater reliability was excellent at all landmarks (ICCs ≥ 0.926) except the elbow with a good reliability (ICC = 0.848). Inter-rater reliability was excellent at the sternum (ICC = 0.950) and good at the ankle, knee, elbow, and forehead (ICCs ≥ 0.813). SEM values varied across landmarks, with lowest values observed at reference landmarks sites (e.g., sternum and forehead). ICCs are similar between sexes. Conclusions: PPT measurements at articular (joints) and bony reference landmarks show good to excellent reliability. These findings support the use of joint PPT in standardized pain sensitivity assessments and provide a basis for clinical and research applications. However, findings are limited to pain-free participants and should be replicated in broader populations.
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.