Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11‐point numerical pain rating scale

By John T. Farrar, J. P. Young, L. Lamoreaux, J. Werth, Michael R. Poole. Pain, 2001

5,521 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

The clinical efficacy of kinesio tape for shoulder pain: a randomized, double-blinded, clinical trial. (2008, neutral): “J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2008;38(7):389-395.”
The efficacy of pain neuroscience education on musculoskeletal pain: A systematic review of the literature (2016, methodology): “Moreover, the mean changes between pre- and post-treatment (and 95% CI) were calculated for the RCTs. Pain reduction of more than 20%, irrespective of the measurement tool used, was considered clinically worthwhile (Farrar et al., 2001; Ferreira et al., 2002).”
High-density thermal sensitivity maps of the human body (2020, methodology): “This scale is similar to the one used in similar studies [18,21], and its choice was based on extensive evidence supporting the applicability and reliability of numerical rating scales for somatic sensations in humans [26,27].”
Pregabalin for the treatment of fibromyalgia syndrome: results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. (2005, methodology): “Using a less stringent difference of 30% improvement from baseline, previously shown to be a clinically meaningful improvement using the numerical rating scale across a range of pain conditions (37), the proportion of patients who would be classified as responders was significantly greater in the 45”