MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2260949861 · doi:10.1188/15.onf.e339-e357

Psychological and Physical Interventions for 
the Management of Cancer-Related Pain in Pediatric and Young Adult Patients: An Integrative Review

2015· review· en· W2260949861 on OpenAlex
Lindsay Jibb, Paul C. Nathan, Bonnie Stevens, Emily Seto, Joseph A Cafazzo, Nisha Stephens, Liza Yohannes, Jennifer Stinson

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueOncology nursing forum · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Pain Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCINAHLPsychological interventionPsycINFOMEDLINEModalitiesHypnosisPhysical therapyCancer painQuality of life (healthcare)Randomized controlled trialCancerAlternative medicinePsychiatryNursingSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To identify and appraise current evidence related to the effectiveness of psychological and physical (nonpharmacologic) pain management modalities for children and young adults with cancer . DATA SOURCES: Electronic searches in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science (from database inception to June 2013) for clinical trials. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 32 unique studies were identified. Substantial heterogeneity existed across identified studies, precluding meta-analysis. Therefore, a narrative review of included studies is presented. Studies featured psychological and/or physical pain interventions for children and young adults (N = 1,171) aged 1-21 years with a variety of cancer diagnoses. Interventions included aromatherapy, art therapy, distraction, hypnosis, physical activity, physical positioning, touch therapy, and multimodal cognitive-behavior therapy. Twenty-two studies (69%) reported success in preventing or reducing pain intensity. The level of evidence and methodologic quality of studies were generally low . CONCLUSIONS: Current nonpharmacologic pain interventions for pediatric and young adult patients with cancer are diverse. Several modalities significantly decreased pain intensity, suggesting that these strategies may be effective methods of pain treatment, particularly in the case of painful medical procedures. Future well-designed, multicenter, randomized, controlled trials are needed to further discern treatment effects on pain and other health outcomes in this population and to compare the relative effectiveness of different modalities. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Nurses play a key role in pain assessment and management in pediatric and young adult patients with cancer. The studies included in this review constitute the beginnings of an evidence base that supports the need to implement psychological and physical interventions to improve pain outcomes in pediatric and young adult patients with cancer.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score0.800

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.411 · 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