Why Are There So Many Ways to Measure Pain? Epistemological and Professional Challenges in Medical Standardization
Pain is a profoundly subjective phenomenon, which remains largely impenetrable to the tools of biomedicine. How, then, do pain researchers—specifically, quantitative medical researchers whose work is predicated on transforming pain into numbers—measure pain in their studies? How do they select and j...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Lodz University Press
2025-01-01
|
| Series: | Qualitative Sociology Review |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://czasopisma.uni.lodz.pl/qualit/article/view/24827 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1823860883683540992 |
|---|---|
| author | Hanna Grol-Prokopczyk |
| author_facet | Hanna Grol-Prokopczyk |
| author_sort | Hanna Grol-Prokopczyk |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Pain is a profoundly subjective phenomenon, which remains largely impenetrable to the tools of biomedicine. How, then, do pain researchers—specifically, quantitative medical researchers whose work is predicated on transforming pain into numbers—measure pain in their studies? How do they select and justify specific measures, and does this process lead to measurement standardization? This article analyzes 79 published medical studies about low back pain (LBP) and 20 interviews with pain experts (including 15 with authors of the reviewed studies) to address these questions. Findings reveal that LBP researchers use an extremely diverse set of outcome measures in their studies, typically based on patient self-report. The subjectivity and interpersonal incomparability of self-reports are widely acknowledged but treated as largely unproblematic—a matter of acceptable measurement error rather than “epistemological purgatory” (Barker 2005). However, researchers frequently disagree on what constitutes a “pain measure.” Many respond to the considerable challenge of treating pain intensity by redefining their work—sometimes in the face of resistance from patients—around other, putatively more treatable domains, such as disability. The diverse, arguably unstandardized approaches to measuring pain appear attributable less to pain’s epistemological fragility than to its therapeutic intractability, and to the medical community’s diffuse social structures and professional goals. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-01abbb02751242a1bc6ace9ac5af45c7 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 1733-8077 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-01-01 |
| publisher | Lodz University Press |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Qualitative Sociology Review |
| spelling | doaj-art-01abbb02751242a1bc6ace9ac5af45c72025-02-10T09:11:13ZengLodz University PressQualitative Sociology Review1733-80772025-01-01211467210.18778/1733-8077.21.1.0325397Why Are There So Many Ways to Measure Pain? Epistemological and Professional Challenges in Medical StandardizationHanna Grol-Prokopczyk0https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3270-637XUniversity at Buffalo, State University of New York Pain is a profoundly subjective phenomenon, which remains largely impenetrable to the tools of biomedicine. How, then, do pain researchers—specifically, quantitative medical researchers whose work is predicated on transforming pain into numbers—measure pain in their studies? How do they select and justify specific measures, and does this process lead to measurement standardization? This article analyzes 79 published medical studies about low back pain (LBP) and 20 interviews with pain experts (including 15 with authors of the reviewed studies) to address these questions. Findings reveal that LBP researchers use an extremely diverse set of outcome measures in their studies, typically based on patient self-report. The subjectivity and interpersonal incomparability of self-reports are widely acknowledged but treated as largely unproblematic—a matter of acceptable measurement error rather than “epistemological purgatory” (Barker 2005). However, researchers frequently disagree on what constitutes a “pain measure.” Many respond to the considerable challenge of treating pain intensity by redefining their work—sometimes in the face of resistance from patients—around other, putatively more treatable domains, such as disability. The diverse, arguably unstandardized approaches to measuring pain appear attributable less to pain’s epistemological fragility than to its therapeutic intractability, and to the medical community’s diffuse social structures and professional goals.https://czasopisma.uni.lodz.pl/qualit/article/view/24827chronic painconsensus recommendationsdata harmonizationinterdisciplinaritymeasurementstandardizationvalidity |
| spellingShingle | Hanna Grol-Prokopczyk Why Are There So Many Ways to Measure Pain? Epistemological and Professional Challenges in Medical Standardization Qualitative Sociology Review chronic pain consensus recommendations data harmonization interdisciplinarity measurement standardization validity |
| title | Why Are There So Many Ways to Measure Pain? Epistemological and Professional Challenges in Medical Standardization |
| title_full | Why Are There So Many Ways to Measure Pain? Epistemological and Professional Challenges in Medical Standardization |
| title_fullStr | Why Are There So Many Ways to Measure Pain? Epistemological and Professional Challenges in Medical Standardization |
| title_full_unstemmed | Why Are There So Many Ways to Measure Pain? Epistemological and Professional Challenges in Medical Standardization |
| title_short | Why Are There So Many Ways to Measure Pain? Epistemological and Professional Challenges in Medical Standardization |
| title_sort | why are there so many ways to measure pain epistemological and professional challenges in medical standardization |
| topic | chronic pain consensus recommendations data harmonization interdisciplinarity measurement standardization validity |
| url | https://czasopisma.uni.lodz.pl/qualit/article/view/24827 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT hannagrolprokopczyk whyaretheresomanywaystomeasurepainepistemologicalandprofessionalchallengesinmedicalstandardization |