English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The general aim of this study was to create a comparative scale of different types of pain through different psychophysical methods and different samples. The psychophysical methods used were magnitude estimation and category estimation. The participants were 30 patients from different outpatient clinics, 30 physicians and 30 nurses. The results were: 1) cancer pain, myocardial infarction pain, renal colic, burn-injury pain, and labor pain were considered more intense, regardless of the psychophysical method used or sample studied; 2) The ranking of different pain intensities, comparing the different psychophysical methods used, resulted in significant agreement levels with Kendal values close to 1.00; 3) There were divergences in the perception of the intensities of some types of pain. These divergences were especially observed between professionals and patients.

Developing a comparative scale of different nociceptive and neuropathic pain through two psychophysical methods