↓ Skip to main content

Using Virtual Human Technology to Examine Weight Bias and the Role of Patient Weight on Student Assessment of Pediatric Pain

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#48 of 474)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
122 Mendeley
Title
Using Virtual Human Technology to Examine Weight Bias and the Role of Patient Weight on Student Assessment of Pediatric Pain
Published in
Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings, June 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10880-018-9569-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shana L. Boyle, David M. Janicke, Michael E. Robinson, Laura D. Wandner

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to investigate the influence of weight bias and demographic characteristics on the assessment of pediatric chronic pain. Weight status, race, and sex were manipulated in a series of virtual human (VH) digital images of children. Using a web-based platform, 96 undergraduate students with health care-related majors (e.g., Health Science, Nursing, Biology, and Pre-Medicine) read a clinical vignette and provided five ratings targeting the assessment of each VH child's pain. Students also answered a weight bias questionnaire. Group-based analyses were conducted to determine the influence of the VH child's weight and demographic cues, as well as greater weight bias on assessment ratings. Male and VH children with obesity were rated as more likely to avoid non-preferred activities due to pain compared to female and healthy weight children, respectively (both p < .001). The pain of VH children with obesity was rated as more likely to be influenced by psychological/behavioral issues compared to the pain of healthy weight VH children (p = .022). African American VH children were rated as experiencing significantly greater pain than Caucasian VH children (p = .037). As child weight increased, low weight bias participants felt more sympathy, while high weight bias participants felt less sympathy (p = .002). Also, low weight bias participants showed increased motivation to help, while high weight bias participants showed less motivation to help, as VH patient weight increased (p = .008). Child weight and evaluator weight bias may be influential in the assessment of pediatric pain. If supported by future research, results highlight the importance of training in evidence-based practice and education on weight bias for students majoring in health-care fields.

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 122 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 122 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 17%
Researcher 12 10%
Student > Bachelor 11 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 8%
Lecturer 6 5%
Other 19 16%
Unknown 43 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 13%
Psychology 11 9%
Sports and Recreations 5 4%
Computer Science 5 4%
Other 13 11%
Unknown 52 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 18 February 2020.
All research outputs
#3,225,338
of 24,417,958 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings
#48
of 474 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,985
of 334,339 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings
#5
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,417,958 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 474 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 334,339 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.