Pain and quality of life in youth with inflammatory bowel disease: the role of parent and youth perspectives on family functioning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Daily pain experiences are a common feature of pediatric inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), which can negatively influence their health-related quality of life (HRQOL). A holistic, family systems approach is needed to further our understanding of daily pain experiences in youth with IBD and their influence on youth's HRQOL. OBJECTIVES: The study's objectives were to (1) provide a detailed description of daily pain experiences in youth with IBD, (2) investigate the relative contribution of family functioning and pain in explaining youth's HRQOL, and (3) explore differences in parental and youth perspectives. METHODS: Sixty youth with IBD (8-17 years) and a parent completed questionnaires to assess family functioning, HRQOL, and pain experiences within the past week. A subsample of 16 youth completed an online diary (7 days) about their pain experiences. RESULTS: When including any pain experiences, higher youth-reported family satisfaction and lower pain intensity were related to better HRQOL, whereas higher parent-reported family cohesion and satisfaction indirectly related to youth HRQOL through lower pain intensity. When only accounting for abdominal pain, pain intensity related negatively with HRQOL, and only parent-reported cohesion showed an indirect relation with HRQOL through pain intensity. Diary data revealed large heterogeneity: abdominal pain, described as cramping, sharp, and/or stinging was most frequent, but other pain symptoms (eg, back pain and headache) often co-occurred. CONCLUSION: The findings provide a rich picture of the daily pain experiences of youth with IBD and underscore the importance of a family systems approach to understand how family functioning and pain symptoms influence HRQOL.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".