Pain Extent, Pain Intensity, and Sleep Quality in Adolescents and Young Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Pain has been shown to be associated with poor sleep quality. The aim of this study was to better understand the role that pain intensity and pain extent (number of painful areas) may play in the sleep quality of young people with acute and chronic pain. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING AND PATIENTS: A convenience sample of adolescents and young adults with acute or chronic pain; 414 individuals ages 12 to 24 (44% with chronic pain). METHODS: We performed a hierarchical regression analysis with sleep as the dependent variable and pain intensity, extent, age and pain chronicity as predictors. RESULTS: Pain extent and pain intensity made significant and independent contributions to the prediction of sleep quality (βs = 0.23 [P < 0.001] and 0.14 [P < 0.01]). Young adults reported poorer sleep than adolescents (β = 0.13, P < 0.01). Two significant interactions emerged: age × intensity (β = 0.39, P < 0.05) and chronicity × intensity (β = 0.88, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Sleep quality in young people could be improved by teaching them strategies to better manage pain intensity and pain extent. Clinical trials to evaluate the efficacy of (and best timing for) pain interventions to improve sleep quality are warranted.
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 | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".