MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Role of Pain in Reduced Quality of Life and Depressive Symptomology in Children With Spina Bifida

2006· article· en· W2043082913 on OpenAlexaff
Bruce Oddson, Christine Clancy, Patrick J. McGrath

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Journal of Pain · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Dysraphism and Malformations
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSpina bifidaQuality of life (healthcare)Depression (economics)Physical therapyChronic painLocus of controlPediatricsPsychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Children with spina bifida report both chronic and acute pain caused by both their condition and the treatments they undergo regularly. This research provides a description of the impact of this pain on their quality of life. METHODS: A sample of 68 children (56% female) between the ages of 8 and 19 completed the Varni/Thompson Pediatric Pain Questionnaire, a supplementary questionnaire on pain, the Children's Depression Inventory, the Nowicki-Strickland Locus of Control Scale for Children, and a pediatric measure of health related quality of life. RESULTS: Health related quality of life was shown to be systematically low in this group as compared with a reference sample of chronically ill children. It was negatively impacted by high reported frequency of pain and high ratings of current pain. Both pain and low quality of life were strongly associated with Children's Depression Inventory scores. Locus of control scores was not associated with quality of life or reported pain. CONCLUSION: The unmanaged pain in children with spina bifida can have a substantial negative impact on quality of life. Better treatment and surveillance of pain and depression symptoms may significantly improve quality of life.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.324 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations65
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Journal of PainSame topicSpinal Dysraphism and MalformationsFrench-language works237,207