MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3106935521 · doi:10.1002/ejp.1704

A linguistic analysis of future narratives in adolescents with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome and their pain‐free peers

2020· article· en· W3106935521 on OpenAlexaff
Emy Nimbley, Line Caes, Abigail Jones, Emma Fisher, Mélanie Noël, Abbie Jordan

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Pain · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Management and Treatment
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
FundersVersus ArthritisPain Relief Foundation
KeywordsSadnessPsychologyPsychosocialAffect (linguistics)AngerCognitionPsychological interventionChronic painDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyPsychotherapistPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS) is a chronic pain condition that often develops after injury, with a typical onset in adolescence. The impact of chronic pain is far-reaching, with many adolescents reporting atypical developmental trajectories compared with peers. Social Comparison Theory offers a framework for understanding how such comparisons influence well-being, whereby a heightened sense of disparity places adolescents at risk of poor cognitive, affective and social outcomes. Using a novel linguistic analysis programme, this study aims to investigate cognitive, affective and social language used by adolescents with CRPS in comparison to their peers during a task reflecting on their futures. METHODS: A story completion task was completed by adolescents with CPRS (n = 49) and adolescents without pain (n = 48). This task involved asking adolescents to describe their imagined future. Narratives were analysed using a novel linguistic analysis programme, focusing on the cognitive, affective and social dimensions. RESULTS: Findings revealed significant group differences in how adolescents with CRPS described their imagined futures. Adolescents with CRPS used significantly fewer positive affect and more negative affect, anger and sadness words, and greater insight and discrepancy words. No significant groups differences were found for social words. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial differences in cognitive and affective words were found between adolescents with and without CRPS. Findings provide novel insights into current understandings of cognitive, affective and social processes in adolescents living with chronic pain, particularly with regard to adolescent developmental trajectories, and may in turn highlight potential targets in psychosocial interventions for adolescents living with chronic pain. SIGNIFICANCE: Social comparisons are commonly undertaken by adolescents with CRPS in relation to peers, increasing risk for poor cognitive, affective and social outcomes. Findings promote the potential importance of targeting psychosocial factors in treatments for paediatric chronic pain.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.438

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.212 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of PainSame topicPain Management and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207