1985
DOI: 10.1016/0304-3959(85)90145-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Pain measurement: an overview

Abstract: The practice and theoretical basis of pain measurement is reviewed and critically examined in the areas of animal research, human subjects laboratory investigation and clinical study. The advantages and limitations of both physiological and behavioral methods are discussed in each area, and subjective report procedures are evaluated in human laboratory and clinical areas. The need for procedures that bridge these areas is emphasized and specific issues are identified. Progress in the technology of pain measure… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

9
431
0
50

Year Published

1987
1987
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 990 publications
(490 citation statements)
references
References 106 publications
9
431
0
50
Order By: Relevance
“…For both conditions, both lumbosacral radiculopathy and carpal tunnel syndrome, it is fundamental to individuate the main outcome measures [52].…”
Section: Outcome Evaluation and Follow-upmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For both conditions, both lumbosacral radiculopathy and carpal tunnel syndrome, it is fundamental to individuate the main outcome measures [52].…”
Section: Outcome Evaluation and Follow-upmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Clinical evaluation included evaluation of pain by a visual analog scale (VAS) without leg and back pain differentiation (26), assessment of subjective functional impairment by Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire (27), and Prolo scales (28).…”
Section: Clinical and Radiological Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Pain was evaluated by means of a visual analog scale (VAS) without leg and back pain differentiation [22]. The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire was used to assess subjective functional impairment [23], while the Prolo semiquantitative scale was used to evaluate the functional and economic status of each patient [24].…”
Section: Clinical Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 99%