Social Functioning and Peer Relationships in Children and Adolescents with Chronic Pain: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Peer relationships during childhood and adolescence are acknowledged to be negatively impacted by chronic pain; however, to date there has been no synthesis of this literature. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review existing literature describing the social functioning and peer relationships in children and adolescents with recurrent or continuous chronic pain. METHODS: Articles on peer relationship factors studied in samples of children and adolescents with chronic pain published in English or French were identified using EMBASE, Medline, CINAHL and PsycINFO. Two independent reviewers performed initial screenings using study titles and abstracts, and reviewed each eligible article in full. RESULTS: Of 1740 published papers yielded by the search, 42 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the present review. Nine studies had peer relationship investigation as the primary purpose of the study; the remaining 33 examined peer relationships as part of a broader study. A range of specific and more general measures was used to examine peer relationships. Across studies, children and adolescents with chronic pain were reported to have fewer friends, be subjected to more peer victimization, and were viewed as more isolated and less likeable than healthy peers. CONCLUSIONS: Children and adolescents with chronic pain have peer relationship deficiencies. However, the majority of studies to date measure peer relationships as part of a broader study and, thus, little attention has been paid specifically to peer relationships in this group. Additional research examining the quality of peer relationships of children and adolescents with chronic pain, as well as development of measures specifically designed to assess these relationships, is needed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".