Understanding the Information and Service Needs of Young Adults With Chronic Pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To qualitatively explore the information and service needs of young adults (YAs) with chronic pain to inform the development of a web-based chronic pain self-management program. METHODS: A convenience sample of YAs (n=17; aged 18 to 29 y) with chronic pain was recruited from 2 adult tertiary care multidisciplinary chronic pain clinics in Ontario. Interdisciplinary health care professionals who had worked in chronic pain for at least 1 year were also recruited from these sites. Five audiotaped focus groups were conducted, 3 for YAs and 2 for health care professionals. Transcribed data were organized into categories that reflected emerging themes. RESULTS: Findings uncovered 4 major themes: (1) pain impact, (2) pain management strategies, (3) barriers to care, and (4) service delivery recommendations. Subthemes were found under each major theme. Pain had an impact on social and emotional realms and role functioning, physical functioning, and future vocational and life goals. Pain management strategies were comprised of psychological, physical, and pharmacological approaches and development of support systems. Barriers to care were revealed at the patient, health care system, and societal levels. Finally, service delivery recommendations were divided into 2 subthemes pertaining to improved services and Internet-based programs. DISCUSSION: Participants unanimously felt that a web-based program would be an acceptable means to help improve access to services and meet the need for more information about chronic pain, strategies to manage pain symptoms, and social support to address the unique developmental needs of YAs.
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 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 | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".