Chronic pain, vulnerability and human spirit while living under the umbrella of COVID-19
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of writing this article is to describe what added challenges people like us who are living with chronic pain are experiencing during the COVID-19 pandemic. We explore what this challenging time means to us and how it affects our lives, along with providing insight into our experiences. This is not a research study, but instead an article that shares perspectives from people with lived experience of chronic pain. Our narratives are presented to create an awareness of the plight for people already living with challenging health conditions and how the COVID-19 pandemic has added additional layers of vulnerability. While these stories offer brief accounts of some of the challenges we face, they also provide glimmers of hope that others with similar challenges can look to for inspiration. We also hope that our stories and reflections provide discussion points and perhaps even case studies for clinicians and policymakers who are working to strengthen clinical care and health systems for people with chronic conditions during pandemics such as COVID-19. Sharing our lived experiences with chronic pain during this global crisis may also spark critical conversations among all chronic pain stakeholders to ensure that we could continue to provide excellent care, strong self-management support and optimal health policy-making as this pandemic continues to unfold and for consideration for future health emergencies. Experience Framework This article is associated with the Quality & Clinical Excellence lens of The Beryl Institute Experience Framework. (http://bit.ly/ExperienceFramework) Access other PXJ articles related to this lens. Access other resources related to this lens.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".