A chronic-pain questionnaire showed strong repeatability, with other measurement questions unresolved
Among questionnaires studied in adults with chronic pain, the Central Sensitization Inventory received the strongest overall measurement ratings. Repeated scores agreed closely, but evidence for other measurement properties remained incomplete.
Based on the published abstract. The full paper may contain additional methods, results and limitations.
The 30-second takeaway
The Central Sensitization Inventory had the highest overall ratings among the reviewed questionnaires and strong agreement when repeated in people with chronic pain. The review examined questionnaires used to assess manifestations of central sensitization. Its findings support this instrument's repeatability, while leaving other aspects of measurement quality incompletely established.
Study quality varied, and most questionnaires had limited supporting evidence. Not every measurement property had been studied, so reliable repeat scores should not be read as complete validation of the instrument.
What researchers found
Central Sensitization Inventory test-retest reliability
Agreement between repeated questionnaire scores in overall chronic pain, measured by an intraclass correlation coefficient; assessment intervals were not reported in the abstract.
What repeatability means
Test-retest reliability concerns consistency between repeated questionnaire scores. Here, the pooled coefficient summarized agreement across repeated assessments. It describes how the instrument performed as a measurement, rather than a reduction in pain or an improvement in health.
Why other properties matter
The reviewers evaluated several aspects of questionnaire quality, but available evidence was uneven. A favorable repeatability result answers a particular question about the instrument; it does not settle all questions about what its scores can establish.
The original publication
Psychometric properties of patient-reported outcome measures in chronic pain conditions with central sensitization- a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Akhter MF, Bobos P, Otalike EG et al.
J Patient Rep Outcomes · 2025
- PubMed ID
- 40643771
- Record checked
AI-assisted research and writing. This explains one selected publication; it is not a complete review of everything known. Our approach.
One more question, understood.
Keep track of the research you’ve explored.