Literature review to characterize the empirical basis for response scale selection in pediatric populations

Abstract

BackgroundDespite the importance of response option selection for patient-reported outcome measures, there seems to be little empirical evidence for the selected scale type. This article provides an overview of the published research on response scale types and empirical support within pediatric populations.MethodsA comprehensive review of the scientific literature was conducted to identify response scale option types appropriate for use in pediatric populations and to review and summarize the available empirical evidence for each scale type.ResultsEleven review/consensus guideline/expert opinion articles and 20 empirical articles that provided guidance or evidence regarding pediatric response scale selection were identified. There was general consensus that 5-point verbal rating scales, including Likert scales, were appropriate for children aged 7 or 8 and older, while graphical or faces scales are often used in pediatric studies with children of younger ages.ConclusionIn general, the verbal rating scale, numeric rating scale, visual analogue scale, and graphical scales have each demonstrated to be reliable and valid response option formats in specific contexts among pediatric populations; however, their appropriateness is dependent upon sample age. When selecting response scales, it is important to consider target population and context of use during the development of patient-reported outcome measures, especially with respect to tense, recall period, attribution, number of options, etc. In addition to age, cognitive development is an important aspect to consider for optimizing pediatric self-reported measures. More research is needed to determine clinically relevant changes and differences within pediatric research, which includes different response scale options.

The clinical effects of laser preparation of tooth surfaces for fissure sealants placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis

“…Kumur et al used a visual analogue scale in which pediatric patients were asked to mark their discomfort on a 100 mm line with extreme ends denoting no discomfort to worst possible discomfort during the procedure. According to Naegeli et al [34], verbal rating scales, visual analogue scales, numeric rating scales, and graphical scales can all be reliable and valid response options in pediatric populations. However, the current empirical basis was insufficient to draw firm conclusions and to make differentiated recommendations.…”

Is the numerical rating scale an adequate predictor for assessing MRI underlying pathologies among painful adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients?

“…The use of self-reporting pain measurements has been described as an important factor for clinical management in the pediatric population [22]. The analog scales, facial scales, word checklists, pain diaries, clinical interviews and pain questionnaires are the most common clinical self-report instruments to assess children's pain [16,22,23]. Among these self-reported pain questionnaires, NRS is the most commonly used tool to measure children's pain.…”

“Passive or interactive virtual reality? The effectiveness for pain and anxiety reduction in pediatric patients”

“…Data were collected on the children's age, gender, presence of a companion, the type of vein viewer device (infrared or ultrasound-guided) and the type of venous approach (blood extraction or vascular cannulation). Pain was measured using the visual analogical scale with facial drawings, the Wong-Baker Faces Pain Scale (Miró et al 2005;Naegeli et al 2018). It consists of six drawn faces with a score of 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, ranging from a smiling face for no pain (0 points) to a crying face for the worst possible pain (10 points).…”