Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
M. Freyd (1923)
The Graphic Rating Scale.Journal of Educational Psychology, 14
A. Williamson, B. Hoggart (2005)
Pain: a review of three commonly used pain rating scales.Journal of clinical nursing, 14 7
M. Manuguerra, G. Heller (2010)
Ordinal Regression Models for Continuous ScalesThe International Journal of Biostatistics, 6
B. Reddy (2006)
The Epidemic of Unrelieved Chronic PainJournal of Legal Medicine, 27
M. Bond, I. Pilowsky (1966)
Subjective assessment of pain and its relationship to the administration of analgesics in patients with advanced cancer.Journal of psychosomatic research, 10 2
D. Price, P. Mcgrath, A. Rafii, Barbara Buckingham (1983)
The validation of visual analogue scales as ratio scale measures for chronic and experimental painPain, 17
J. Lindsey (2000)
Applying Generalized Linear Models
C. Ananth, D. Kleinbaum (1997)
Regression models for ordinal responses: a review of methods and applications.International journal of epidemiology, 26 6
M. Wewers, N. Lowe (1990)
A critical review of visual analogue scales in the measurement of clinical phenomena.Research in nursing & health, 13 4
Peter Butler (1997)
Linear Analogue Self-Assessment and Procrustean Measurement: A Critical Review of Visual Analogue Scaling in Pain AssessmentJournal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings, 4
Else Breivik, G. Björnsson, E. Skovlund (2000)
A comparison of pain rating scales by sampling from clinical trial data.The Clinical journal of pain, 16 1
B. Philip (1990)
Parametric statistics for evaluation of the visual analog scale.Anesthesia and analgesia, 71 6
S. Stevens, H. Meyerhoff, W. Davis, I. Bacto-Agar (1946)
On the Theory of Scales of Measurement.Science, 103 2684
E. Svensson (2000)
Comparison of the Quality of Assessments Using Continuous and Discrete Ordinal Rating ScalesBiometrical Journal, 42
Douglas Altman (1998)
Statistical reviewing for medical journals.Statistics in medicine, 17 23
R. Dworkin, D. Turk, J. Farrar, J. Haythornthwaite, M. Jensen, Nathaniel Katz, R. Kerns, G. Stucki, R. Allen, N. Bellamy, D. Carr, Julie Chandler, P. Cowan, R. Dionne, B. Galer, S. Hertz, A. Jadad, Lynn Kramer, D. Manning, Susan Martin, Cynthia McCormick, M. Mcdermott, P. McGrath, S. Quessy, B. Rappaport, W. Robbins, James Robinson, M. Rothman, M. Royal, Lee Simon, Joseph Stauffer, Wendy Stein, Jane Tollett, J. Wernicke, J. Witter (2003)
Core outcome measures for chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendationsPain, 113
D. Turk, R. Dworkin, D. Revicki, G. Harding, L. Burke, D. Cella, C. Cleeland, P. Cowan, J. Farrar, S. Hertz, M. Max, B. Rappaport (2008)
Identifying important outcome domains for chronic pain clinical trials: An IMMPACT survey of people with painPAIN®, 137
P. Kersten, A. Tennant, A. Küçükdeveci (2012)
Reply on “How should we use the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS ) in Rehabilitation Outcomes?”Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 44
F. Dexter, D. Chestnut (1995)
Analysis of Statistical Tests to Compare Visual Analog Scale Measurements among GroupsAnesthesiology, 82
R. Team (2014)
R: A language and environment for statistical computing.MSOR connections, 1
P. Kersten, A. Küçükdeveci, A. Tennant (2012)
The use of the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) in rehabilitation outcomes.Journal of rehabilitation medicine, 44 7
E. Svensson (2012)
Different ranking approaches defining association and agreement measures of paired ordinal dataStatistics in Medicine, 31
M. Jensen, P. Karoly, S. Braver (1986)
The measurement of clinical pain intensity: a comparison of six methodsPain, 27
Jane Scott, E. Huskisson (1976)
Graphic representation of painPain, 2
Takashi Nakamura, S. Ebihara, Ikuko Ohkuni, Hideaki Izukura, T. Harada, Nobuyuki Ushigome, T. Ohshiro, Y. Musha, Hiroshi Takahashi, Kazuaki Tsuchiya, A. Kubota (2014)
Low Level Laser Therapy for chronic knee joint pain patients.Laser therapy, 23 4
B. Park, E. Mammen, Young Lee, Eun Lee (2015)
Varying Coefficient Regression Models: A Review and New DevelopmentsInternational Statistical Review, 83
D. Price, R. Staud, M. Robinson (2012)
How should we use the visual analogue scale (VAS) in rehabilitation outcomes? II: Visual analogue scales as ratio scales: an alternative to the view of Kersten et al.Journal of rehabilitation medicine, 44 9
Simon Wood (2006)
Generalized Additive Models: An Introduction with R
Kathrine Fodstad, A. Staff, K. Laine (2014)
Effect of different episiotomy techniques on perineal pain and sexual activity 3 months after deliveryInternational Urogynecology Journal, 25
M. Forrest, B. Andersen (1986)
Ordinal scale and statistics in medical research.British Medical Journal (Clinical research ed.), 292
AbstractBackground and aimsThe Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) is a popular tool for the measurement of pain. A variety of statistical methods are employed for its analysis as an outcome measure, not all of them optimal or appropriate. An issue which has attracted much discussion in the literature is whether VAS is at a ratio or ordinal level of measurement. This decision has an influence on the appropriate method of analysis. The aim of this article is to provide an overview of current practice in the analysis of VAS scores, to propose a method of analysis which avoids the shortcomings of more traditional approaches, and to provide best practice recommendations for the analysis of VAS scores.MethodsWe report on the current usage of statistical methods, which fall broadly into two categories: those that assume a probability distribution for VAS, and those that do not. We give an overview of these methods, and propose continuous ordinal regression, an extension of current ordinal regression methodology, which is appropriate for VAS at an ordinal level of measurement. We demonstrate the analysis of a published data set using a variety of methods, and use simulation to compare the power of the various methods to detect treatment differences, in differing pain situations.ResultsWe demonstrate that continuous ordinal regression provides the most powerful statistical analysis under a variety of conditions.Conclusions and ImplicationsWe recommend that in the situation in which no covariates besides treatment group are included in the analysis, distribution-free methods (Wilcoxon, Mann–Whitney) be used, as their power is indistinguishable from that of the proposed method. In the situation in which there are covariates which affect VAS, the proposed method is optimal. However, in this case, if the VAS scores are not concentrated around either extreme of the scale, normal-distribution methods (t-test, linear regression) are almost as powerful, and are recommended as a pragmatic choice. In the case of small sample size and VAS skewed to either extreme of the scale, the proposed method has vastly superior power to other methods.
Scandinavian Journal of Pain – de Gruyter
Published: Oct 1, 2016
Keywords: Visual Analogue Scale; Level of measurement; Ordinal measure; Ordinal regression analysis; Wilcoxon test; Linear regression
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.