A Systematic Review of the Prospective Relationship between Child Maltreatment and Chronic Pain
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The present systematic review aimed to evaluate the association between childhood maltreatment and chronic pain, with specific attention to the temporal nature of the relationship and putative moderators, including, the nature (type), timing of occurrence, and magnitude of maltreatment; whether physical harm or injury occurred; and whether post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) subsequently developed. METHOD: We included studies that measured the prospective relationship between child maltreatment and pain. Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL were searched electronically up to 28 July 2019. We used accepted methodological procedures common to prognosis studies and preregistered our review (PROSPERO record ID 142169) as per Cochrane review recommendations. RESULTS: Nine studies (17,340 participants) were included in the present review. Baseline participant age ranged from 2 years to more than 65 years. Follow-up intervals ranged from one year to 16 years. Of the nine studies included, three were deemed to have a high risk of bias. With the exception of one meta-analysis of three studies, results were combined using narrative synthesis. Results showed low to very low quality and conflicting evidence across the various types of maltreatment, with the higher quality studies pointing to the absence of direct (non-moderated and non-mediated) associations between maltreatment and pain. PTSD was revealed to be a potential mediator and/or moderator. Evidence was not found for other proposed moderators. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there is an absence of evidence from high quality studies of an association between maltreatment and pain. Our results are limited by the small number of studies reporting the relationship between child maltreatment and pain using a prospective design. High quality studies, including prospective cohort studies and those that assess and report on the moderators described above, are needed to advance the literature.
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.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it