Changing the culture of care for children and adolescents with functional neurological disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As members of a multidisciplinary team of professionals who treat children and adolescents with functional neurological (conversion) disorder (FND), we highlight the pressing need to develop an FND-informed culture of care that takes into account recent advances in our understanding of this group of patients. Stories of clinical encounters in health care settings from around the world—told by children and adolescents with FND, their parents, and health professionals—portray an outdated culture of care characterized by iatrogenic stigma, erosion of empathy and compassion within the clinician-patient relationship, and a lack of understanding of FND and its complex neurobiology. After a brief exploration of the outdated culture, we share our counterstories: how we and our colleagues have worked, and continue to work, to create an FND-informed culture in the health systems where we practice. We discuss the therapeutic use of child-friendly language. We also discuss a range of structural, educational, and process interventions that can be used to promote FND-informed beliefs and attitudes, FND-informed clinician-patient encounters, and FND-informed referral processes, treatment pathways, and therapeutic interventions.
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 | 0.009 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".