Pain and its clinical associations in individuals with cystic fibrosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pain is recognized as a clinical complication in cystic fibrosis (CF), but the prevalence, characteristics and clinical associations of this co-morbidity have not been systematically reviewed. Electronic searches of six databases were performed. For inclusion in phase 1, studies reported a pain prevalence rate in CF and/or its clinical associations. For phase 2, included studies reported the measurement properties of validity, reliability and responsiveness of an instrument assessing pain in CF. Two independent reviewers rated the quality of evidence (phase 1) and the measurement properties using the 4-point COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist (phase 2). Of the 400 studies identified in the literature, 16 met the inclusion criteria for phase 1 and 5 for phase 2. The mean (SD) quality score (of 16) was 11.8 (2.3). The pooled prevalence of pain in adults with CF was 77% (95% confidence interval (CI): 57%-92%) and in children was 42% (95% CI: 0%-91%). Common regions of pain included back, abdomen, chest and limbs. In children and adults, pain was associated with a poorer quality of life (QOL) and significant interference with treatments. Measurement properties of three instruments (Brief Pain Inventory, Multidimensional Pain Inventory, Daily Pain Assessment-CF) were construct validity and criterion-predictive validity, with variable findings based on 'fair' to 'good' quality studies. Pain is a common problem in both children and adults with CF. It has negative clinical associations with QOL and the ability to successfully undertake treatment. Further research exploring the measurement properties of instruments assessing pain is required.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".