The Acute Care of Chronic Pain Study: Perceptions of Acute Care Providers on Chronic Pain, a Social Media-based Investigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction The diagnosis of chronic pain involves symptoms of pain of various etiologies lasting longer than six months. The prevalence of chronic pain in society ranges from 19% to 31% in North America. While chronic pain patient perceptions on the care provided to them in the Emergency Department (ED) have been studied, there has not been significant attention given to the attitudes of acute care providers towards these patients. Methods We utilized online questionnaires disseminated on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, and emergency medicine blogs to gauge care provider attitudes of chronic pain patients. Survey respondents included ED physicians and their trainees, ED nurses and nurse practitioners, paramedics, and physician assistants. Results Responses revealed numerous factors impacting care provider dissatisfaction with treating chronic pain in the ED; significant factors included the lack of longitudinal care and inappropriate medication of chronic pain resulting in dependency. We found that additional chronic pain-specific training was associated with increased care provider confidence in the treatment of chronic pain. Practice patterns were found to be varied, with half of the respondents stating that chronic pain should be medicated acutely. Conclusions We conclude that acute care provider dissatisfaction with chronic pain treatment is multifactorial in origin and that confidence in the acute treatment of chronic pain can be improved with chronic pain-specific training.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".