ReviewPaediatric & neonatal pain2026
Assessing Pain in Children: A Narrative Review of Distraction-Based Interventions and Outcome Measurement Tools.
Review in Paediatric & neonatal 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Procedural pain and fear are common during pediatric immunizations and other needle-related procedures. This narrative review examined distraction-based, non-pharmacological interventions and the outcome measures used to assess pain and fear in children aged 6-12 years, with particular attention to AI-based interactive games and the Buzzy/Buzzle Bee cold-vibration device. A structured search of multiple databases identified 30 peer-reviewed studies published between 2015 and 2024. Studies were synthesized narratively according to intervention type, pain/fear outcomes, and measurement approach. Technology-based distraction, particularly virtual reality (VR), was associated with reduced pain, fear, or anxiety across multiple studies. Cold-vibration devices also reduced procedural pain and distress, while low-cost distraction methods provided practical alternatives. Outcome measures included self-report pain scales, fear scales, behavioral measures, proxy ratings, and physiological indicators. The findings support distraction-based approaches while highlighting substantial variation in outcome measurement and the need for consistent, developmentally appropriate assessment tools. Although these interventions show promise, the studies vary widely in how pain and fear are measured. The studies included used a variety of outcome measures, including self-report pain scales, fear scales, behavioral assessment tools, proxy ratings, and physiological indicators, making direct comparisons across studies more difficult. These inconsistencies highlight the need for more standardized and developmentally appropriate outcome measures. By summarizing current evidence and identifying gaps in assessment practices, this review underscores the importance of using reliable, child-centered tools to evaluate distraction-based interventions. Integrating these evidence-based distraction strategies into routine pediatric care may help reduce procedural trauma, improve children's experiences, and support more child-centered care.
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.