Expression of pain among Mi'kmaq children in one Atlantic Canadian community: a qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: First Nation children have the highest rates of pain-related conditions among Canadian children, yet there is little research on how this population expresses its pain or how and whether the pain is successfully treated. The aim of this study was to understand how Mi'kmaq children express pain and how others interpret it. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative ethnographic study in a large Canadian Mi'kmaq community using interviews and conversation sessions. Participants included children and youth (n = 76), parents (n = 12) teachers (n = 7), elders (n = 6) and health care professionals (n = 13). RESULTS: Interpretive descriptive analysis was used and themes regarding pain expression, care seeking and pain management were identified. Pain expression included stoicism and hiding behaviour, and, when pain was discussed, it was via storytelling and descriptive language, such as similes. Participants reported feeling unheard, stereotyped and frustrated when they sought pain care. Frustration led to avoidance of seeking further care, perceptions of racism and repeat visits because of unsuccessful previous treatment. Participants voiced concerns about the utility of the numeric and faces pain scales to describe pain meaningfully. Positive encounters occurred when participants felt respected and heard. INTERPRETATION: Mi'kmaq children are stoic and often hide their pain. Community members feel frustrated and discriminated against when their pain is not identified, and conventional pain assessment tools may not be useful. If clinicians consider cultural context, build trust and allow for additional time to assess pain via storytelling or word descriptions as well as a family-centred approach, better pain care may occur.
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 | 0.007 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".