What really matters in pediatric chronic pain rehabilitation? Results of a multi-stakeholder nominal group technique study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To prioritize outcome domains sensitive to the needs of the various stakeholders involved in rehabilitation programs designed for youth with pain-related disability using the International Classification of Function Child and Youth version.Materials and methods: A 5-step nominal group technique was conducted with 13 stakeholders, including two youth with pain-related disability, two parents, five clinicians, two teachers, and two healthcare managers. Once identified by content thematic analysis and International Classification of Function linking, 15 outcome domains were ranked. Priority rank scores were then weighted.Results: Six outcome domains were prioritized: (1) activities of daily living, (2) participation in meaningful activities, (3) social roles and relationships, (4) mood and affect, (5) school engagement, and (6) self-efficacy. Discrepancies in ranking existed; parents and youth attributed importance to pain, sleep, and program satisfaction whereas clinicians and mangers underscored pain-related fear and family functioning. When compared, prioritized domain associated with three PedIMMPACT recommendations and aligned with the activity and participation components of the International Classification of Function for Child and Youth.Conclusion: These findings emphasize the importance of integrating various perspectives, including those of youth with pain-related disability and other important stakeholders and adopting a broader conceptualization of disability and function when selecting key rehabilitation evaluation outcome for this population.Implications for rehabilitationThe identification of value differences among stakeholder underscores the importance of engaging youths, their families and other stakeholders, such as teachers and health care managers in rehabilitation program evaluation.The consensus processes employed allowed for the reconciliation of the different priorities, and the achievement of agreement on participation in life and its related activities as a key desired outcome of rehabilitation programs for youth with pain-related disability.The use of the ICF-CY framework allowed a broader conceptualization of the rehabilitation outcome domains, and the examination of areas beyond reduction of pain, disability and impairment to include functional aspects such as self-care, daily routine and mobility activities, and meaningful participation in life, fostering social roles and responsibilities, and school engagement.As participation in life and its related tasks and activities were key outcomes for all stakeholders, they should be the focus of clinicians’ treatment.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.033 | 0.060 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".