All 4 faces pain scales were found to be adequately supported by psychometric data .
When given a choice between faces scales , children preferred the WBFPRS .
Confounding of pain intensity with affect caused by use of smiling and crying anchor faces is a disadvantage of the WBFPRS .
: For clinical use , we found no grounds to switch from 1 faces scale to another when 1 of the scales is in use .
CONTEXT : Numerous faces scales have been developed for the measurement of  pain intensity in children .
It remains unclear whether any one of the faces scales is better for a particular purpose with regard to validity , reliability , feasibility , and preference .
OBJECTIVES : To summarize and systematic ally review faces pain scales most commonly used to obtain self-report of pain intensity in children for evaluation of reliability and validity and to compare the scales for preference and utility .
The convergent validity of the Manchester Pain Scale.
OBJECTIVE To test the convergent validity of the Manchester pain scale when compared to the current ' gold st and ard ' in children 's pain assessment , the Oucher pain scale . METHOD One hundred and fifty two children presenting to the emergency department had  pain scale assessment  s using both the Manchester and Oucher pain scales .  The order of presentation of the scales was r and omised . The degree of convergence between the scales was assessed using Spearman 's rank correlation as well as Bl and and Altman plots . RESULTS One hundred and thirteen children used numerical scales ; the correlation coefficient for these was 0.802 . Thirty nine children used pictorial scales ; the correlation coefficient was 0.820 . CONCLUSION There is strong convergent validity between the scales as demonstrated by a high degree of correlation between the numerical and pictorial scores generated by the Manchester and Oucher pain scales . The  Manchester pain scale  can be used to assess pain in children presenting to emergency departments
All 4 faces pain scales were found to be adequately supported by psychometric data .
When given a choice between faces scales , children preferred the WBFPRS .
Confounding of pain intensity with affect caused by use of smiling and crying anchor faces is a disadvantage of the WBFPRS .
: For clinical use , we found no grounds to switch from 1 faces scale to another when 1 of the scales is in use .
CONTEXT : Numerous faces scales have been developed for the measurement of  pain intensity in children .
It remains unclear whether any one of the faces scales is better for a particular purpose with regard to validity , reliability , feasibility , and preference .
OBJECTIVES : To summarize and systematic ally review faces pain scales most commonly used to obtain self-report of pain intensity in children for evaluation of reliability and validity and to compare the scales for preference and utility .