Review: psychological interventions reduce the severity and frequency of chronic pain in children and adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Eccleston C, Morley S, Williams A, et al. Systematic review of randomised controlled trials of psychological therapy for chronic pain in children and adolescents, with a subset meta-analysis of pain relief. Pain2002 ; 99 : 157 –65 [OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2][PubMed][3][Web of Science][4] QUESTION: In children and adolescents with chronic pain and associated distress and disability, are psychological interventions effective for reducing the frequency and severity of pain? Studies were identified by searching the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Medline (1966–99), PsycLIT (1987–99), EMBASE/Excerpta Medica (1980–99), and the Social Sciences Indices (1981–99). Bibliographies of relevant articles were reviewed, and experts in the field were contacted for additional studies. Studies were selected if they were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing a clearly defined psychological treatment (even when this treatment was concomitant with other non-psychological treatments given as standard care) with a control condition (wait list and self monitoring) … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DPain%26rft.stitle%253DPain%26rft.aulast%253DEccleston%26rft.auinit1%253DC.%26rft.volume%253D99%26rft.issue%253D1-2%26rft.spage%253D157%26rft.epage%253D165%26rft.atitle%253DSystematic%2Breview%2Bof%2Brandomised%2Bcontrolled%2Btrials%2Bof%2Bpsychological%2Btherapy%2Bfor%2Bchronic%2Bpain%2Bin%2Bchildren%2Band%2Badolescents%252C%2Bwith%2Ba%2Bsubset%2Bmeta-analysis%2Bof%2Bpain%2Brelief.%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1016%252FS0304-3959%252802%252900072-6%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F12237193%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S0304-3959(02)00072-6&link_type=DOI [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=12237193&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febnurs%2F6%2F2%2F45.atom [4]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000178439800016&link_type=ISI
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 | 0.003 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".