Loss-adjusting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS) is a chronic pain condition that can present specific difficulties when occurring in adolescence. There is limited work exploring future narratives of healthy adolescents, and how these may differ for those who have chronic health conditions, but there is no research on the future narratives of adolescents who have CRPS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this study, 50 adolescents (44 females, 5 males, 1 preferred not to say) aged 14 to 25 years (mean=19.8, SD=3.68), completed an online story completion task, with a further sample of 10 completing a follow-up telephone interview. RESULTS: Story completion data were initially analyzed deductively based on the work of Morley and colleagues using hoped-for and feared-for future codes, revealing higher instances of hope (291 over 48 stories) than fear (99 over 27 stories). These codes were subsequently analyzed alongside the in-depth interview data using inductive thematic analysis, generating 2 themes that represent distinct, yet related, approaches of how adolescents incorporate CRPS into their future narratives: (1) the centrality of loss theme identifies the ways some adolescents described how CRPS brings loss, with narratives focused on how these adolescents imagine such losses continuing into the future, and (2) the adjusting to loss theme illustrates the ways other adolescents were able to imagine a future in which they were able to adjust to the losses which CRPS may bring. DISCUSSION: CRPS may damage the future plans of adolescents. However, being or learning how to be flexible about these goals, may help them to build more positive future narratives.
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 | 0.003 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".