An acceptance-based intervention for children and adolescents with cancer experiencing acute pain – a single-subject study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Children and adolescents with cancer report pain as one of their most recurrent and troublesome symptoms throughout the cancer trajectory. Pain evokes psychological distress, which in turn has an amplifying effect on the pain experience. Acceptance-based interventions for experimentally induced acute pain predict increased pain tolerance, decreased pain intensity and decreased discomfort of pain. The aim of this study was to preliminarily evaluate an acceptance-based intervention for children and adolescents with cancer experiencing acute pain, with regard to feasibility and effect on pain intensity and discomfort of pain. METHODS: This is a single-subject study with an AB design with a nonconcurrent multiple baseline. Children and adolescents aged four to 18 years undergoing cancer treatment at the Children's University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden, reporting sustained acute pain were offered participation. Pain intensity and discomfort of pain were measured during baseline and at post-intervention. The intervention consisted of a pain exposure exercise lasting approximately 15 minutes. RESULTS: Five children participated in the study. All participants completed the intervention and reported that it had helped them to cope with the pain in the moment. All participants reported decreased discomfort of pain at post-measurement, three of whom also reported decreased pain intensity. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that an acceptance-based intervention may help children and adolescents with cancer to cope with the pain that is often associated with cancer treatment in spite of pharmacological pain management. The results are tentative but promising and warrant further investigation.
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 | 0.019 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".