A Cognitive-Behavioral Group Intervention for Parents of Youth with Chronic Pain: Development, Feasibility, and Preliminary Effectiveness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Caregiving for a youth with chronic pain is associated with unique stressors. Parents can play important roles for youth coping and functional outcomes, although parents often report uncertainty about how to support their youth and may benefit from learning evidence-based strategies. However, few parent-targeted interventions for pediatric chronic pain exist, particularly delivered within a group format. Objectives: The aims of this study were to describe the development of a parent-targeted group intervention within an outpatient interdisciplinary pediatric chronic pain clinic and to assess preliminary feasibility and effectiveness. Method: The development and content of the intervention are described in detail. Feasibility was assessed via enrollment, attendance, and attrition. Effectiveness was assessed via parent self-reported responses to pain and psychological flexibility (PF) before and after treatment. Results: Seventy parents consented and participated in the 5-week group intervention (2 hr/session). Preliminary results demonstrated adequate feasibility, with attendance rates at 61.4% and attrition rates at 24.3%. After treatment, there were significant moderate- to large-sized decreases in 3 of 4 parent behaviors assessed (protectiveness, monitoring, minimizing) and large-sized increases in PF. Conclusions: This group intervention for parents can produce positive changes in self-reported parent behavior and PF and may be a feasible way to intervene within an outpatient interdisciplinary setting. Implications for Impact Statement Parents play important roles for supporting coping and functional outcomes in youth with chronic pain, although parents report uncertainty over how to best support their youth and may benefit from learning evidence-based strategies. This study suggests that a relatively brief parent-targeted group intervention (5 weeks, 2 hr/week) may help promote psychological flexibility and reduce unhelpful parent behaviours that may reinforce 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 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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".