↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Effect of a perspective-taking intervention on the consideration of pain assessment and treatment decisions

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain Research, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
Title
Effect of a perspective-taking intervention on the consideration of pain assessment and treatment decisions
Published in
Journal of Pain Research, November 2015
DOI 10.2147/jpr.s88033
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laura D Wandner, Calia A Torres, Emily J Bartley, Steven Z George, Michael E Robinson

Abstract

Pain is often poorly managed, highlighting the need to better understand and treat patients' pain. Research suggests that pain is assessed and treated differently depending on patient sex, race, and/or age. Perspective-taking, whereby one envisions the perspective of another, has been found to reduce racial disparities in pain management. This study used virtual human (VH) technology to examine whether a perspective-taking intervention impacts pain management decisions. Ninety-six participants were randomized to an online treatment or control group and viewed 16 video clips of VHs with standardized levels of pain. Participants provided ratings on the VHs' pain intensity and their willingness to administer opioids to them. The intervention group received a brief perspective-taking intervention that consisted of having participants imagine how the patient's suffering could affect his/her life, whereas the control group was asked to wait for the next VH videos to load. A LENS model analysis was used to investigate both group level (nomothetic) and individual level (idiographic) decision policies. A LENS model of analysis is typically used as an analog method for capturing how groups of people and individuals use information in their environment to form judgments. Nomothetic results found that participants rated pain higher and were more likely to prescribe opioids to VHs postintervention, irrespective of group. Idiographic results, however, found that the use of cues to make pain management decisions was mitigated by the perspective-taking group. The participants in the perspective-taking group were more likely to think about pain and the patients' perspective during the intervention, while control participants were more likely to reflect on the VHs' sex, race, or age. A brief intervention may alter participants' pain management decisions. These results indicate that a brief intervention might be an initial step toward aligning observers' pain management ratings with those of the patient. Future research is needed to replicate findings in a health care population.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 28%
Student > Master 6 15%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Researcher 2 5%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 10 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 9 23%
Psychology 9 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 10%
Social Sciences 3 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 12 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 February 2023.
All research outputs
#4,808,622
of 23,221,875 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#518
of 1,781 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,579
of 285,344 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#12
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,221,875 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,781 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 285,344 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.