Is all validation equal? Evaluating sensory- and emotion-focused validation in the context of experimentally induced pain.

Validation has been examined in experimental and clinical settings, but examination of whether specific content of validation responses affect pain-related outcomes has not been considered. We examined the impact of sensory- or emotion-focused validation following a pain task. Participants (N = 140) were randomly assigned to one of three validation conditions (i.e. sensory, emotional, or neutral) and completed the cold pressor task (CPT). Participants provided self-report ratings of pain and affective-related variables. Subsequently, a researcher validated emotional, sensory, or no aspects of participants' experience. The CPT was repeated, as were the self-report ratings. No significant differences were observed across conditions in pain or affective outcomes. All conditions reported an increase in pain intensity and pain unpleasantness across CPT trials. These findings suggest validation content may not impact pain outcomes during painful experiences. Future directions to understanding the nuances of validation across interactions and settings are discussed.

Smartphone apps for menstrual pain and symptom management: A scoping review.

The past decade marks a surge in the development of mobile apps used to digitally track and monitor aspects of personal health, including menstruation. Despite a plethora of menstruation-related apps, pain and symptom management content available in apps has not been systematically examined. The objective of this study was to evaluate app characteristics, overall quality (i.e., engagement, functionality, design aesthetics, and information), nature and quality of pain and symptom tracking features, and availability and quality of pain-related intervention content. A scoping review of apps targeting facets of the menstrual experience was conducted by searching the Apple App Store. After removal of duplicates and screening, 119 apps targeting menstrual experiences were retained. Pain and menstrual symptoms tracking were available in 64 % of apps. Checkboxes or dichotomous (present/absent) reporting was the most common method of tracking symptoms and was available in 75 % of apps. Only a small subset (n = 13) of apps allowed for charting/graphing of pain symptoms across cycles. Fourteen percent of apps included healthcare professionals or researchers in their development and one app reported use of end-users. Overall app quality measured through the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) was found to be acceptable; however, the apps ability to impact pain and symptom management (e.g., impact on knowledge, awareness, behaviour change, etc.) was rated as low. Only 10 % of apps (n = 12) had interventions designed to manage pain. The findings suggest that despite pain and symptom management content being present in apps, this content is largely not evidence-based in nature. More research is needed to understand how pain and symptom management content can be integrated into apps to improve user experiences.