# Revisiting symptom/sign

**URL:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/revisiting-symptom-sign/1867
**Category:** Clinical
**Tags:** archetype, modelling-patterns
**Created:** [15 September 2021 09:16 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/revisiting-symptom-sign/1867 "2021-09-15T09:16:50Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Showing post:** 15

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![ian.mcnicoll](https://discourse.openehr.org/user_avatar/discourse.openehr.org/ian.mcnicoll/32/4430_2.png) [@ian.mcnicoll](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/ian.mcnicoll)
#### Post date: [26 September 2021 10:03 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/revisiting-symptom-sign/1867/15 "2021-09-26T10:03:45Z")

</div>

THi Heather,

This cam from the Dutch ZIB models

[https://zibs.nl/wiki/PainScore-v4.0(2020EN)](https://zibs.nl/wiki/PainScore-v4.0(2020EN))

> The score is a general measurement of pain experience, not a description of specific, localized pain.
> 
> Depending on the measuring method used, it indicates the level of pain experienced by the patient on a scale of 0 to 10: 0 = no pain and 10 = the worst pain imaginable. No descriptions are used for the intermediate values, so that the value is displayed as a number and not as a code.
> 
> Sometimes a value range of 0-100 is used instead of 0-10."

and digging a little further

> **[Outcome\_Measures\_January\_2019.pdf](https://www.britishpainsociety.org/static/uploads/resources/files/Outcome_Measures_January_2019.pdf)**
>
> 477.86 KB

For what it’s worth I share your clinical view that 71 vs 72 is pretty meaningless, nevertheless 0…100 does seem to be fairly established. Tom’s suggestion of using Proportion initially seemed counter-intuitive but I can see how it does solve the problem, though I would question whether comparing different VAS scores with different ranges is going to be a real-world requirement. A lot will depend on the content of the question, not just the response.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/revisiting-symptom-sign/1867)._