Clinical Impact and Evidence Base for Physiotherapy in Treating Childhood Chronic Pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: As part of the special series on pain, our objectives are to describe the key features of chronic pain in children, present the rationale for interdisciplinary treatment, report a case study based on our biopsychosocial approach, and highlight the integral role of physiotherapy in reducing children's pain and improving function. We also evaluate the evidence base supporting physiotherapy for treating chronic neuropathic pain in children. SUMMARY OF KEY POINTS: Chronic pain affects many children and adolescents. Certain challenging pain conditions begin primarily during adolescence and disproportionately affect girls and women. Children with these conditions require an interdisciplinary treatment programme that includes physiotherapy as well as medication and/or psychological intervention. Converging lines of evidence from cohort follow-up studies, retrospective chart reviews, and one randomized controlled trial support the effectiveness of physiotherapy within an interdisciplinary programme for treating children with chronic pain. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence-based practice dictates that health care providers adopt clear guidelines for determining when treatments are effective and for identifying children for whom such treatments are most effective. Thus, additional well-designed trials are required to better identify the specific physiotherapy modalities that are most important in improving children's pain and function.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".