MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113705798 · doi:10.1093/jpepsy/28.1.47

Pain Reactivity and Somatization in Kindergarten-Age Children

2002· article· en· W2113705798 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Psychology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Pain Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
FundersUniversity of Northern British Columbia
KeywordsSomatizationTemperamentReactivity (psychology)PsychologyClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyAnxietyPsychiatryPersonalityMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate predictors of somatization and pain reactivity in childhood. METHODS: Facial expressions of children undergoing inoculation were scored for pain reactivity. Measures of temperament, pain experience, pain models, parental behavior, and parental ability to decode pain were examined for their ability to predict pain reactivity and somatization in a structural modeling analysis. RESULTS: Pain reactivity was associated positively with parental reports of their child's somatization. Child temperament, previous negative experiences with medical procedures, and maternal responses to their children's pain were positively associated with pain reactivity. CONCLUSIONS: Temperament and pain experience may play a role in children's pain reactivity, and reactivity may contribute to the development of somatization. Although the model that guided the analysis proved to be a reasonable description of the outcomes, several anticipated relationships were not significant. We discuss implications for a refined model of somatization and for early identification and prevention.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.443

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.277 · 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