Topical Review: Resilience Resources and Mechanisms in Pediatric Chronic Pain
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To apply resilience theory and the extant literature to propose a resilience-risk model for pediatric chronic pain and provide an agenda for research and clinical practice in pediatric chronic pain resilience. METHOD: Literature review to develop a resilience-risk model for pediatric chronic pain. RESULTS: The chronic pain literature has identified unique individual and social/environmental resilience resources and pain-related resilience mechanisms that promote pain adaptation. These data support our ecological resilience-risk model for pediatric chronic pain, and the model highlights novel directions for clinical and research efforts for youth with chronic pain. CONCLUSIONS: The examination of pediatric chronic pain from a strengths-based approach might lead to novel clinical avenues to empower youth to positively adapt and live beyond their pain.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it