Canadian surveillance study of complex regional pain syndrome in children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: This study describes the minimum incidence of pediatric complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), clinical features, and treatments recommended by pediatricians and pain clinics in Canada. Participants in the Canadian Paediatric Surveillance Program reported new cases of CRPS aged 2 to 18 years monthly and completed a detailed case reporting questionnaire from September 2017 to August 2019. Descriptive analysis was completed, and the annual incidence of CRPS by sex and age groupings was estimated. A total of 198 cases were reported to the Canadian Paediatric Surveillance Program, and 168 (84.8%) met the case definition. The minimum Canadian incidence of CRPS is estimated at 1.14/100,000 (95% confidence interval 0.93-1.35/100,000) children per year. Incidence was highest among girls 12 years and older (3.10, 95% confidence interval 2.76-3.44/100,000). The mean age of CRPS diagnosis was 12.2 years (SD = 2.4), with the mean time from symptom onset to diagnosis of 5.6 months (SD = 9.9) and no known inciting event for 19.6% of cases. Most cases had lower limb involvement (79.8%). Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (82.7%) and acetaminophen (66.0%) were prescribed more commonly than antiepileptic drugs (52.3%) and antidepressants (32.0%). Referrals most commonly included physical therapy (83.3%) and multidisciplinary pain clinics (72.6%); a small number of patients withdrew from treatment because of pain exacerbation (5.3%). Pain education was recommended for only 65.6% of cases. Treatment variability highlights the need for empiric data to support treatment of pediatric CRPS and development of treatment consensus guidelines.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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".