Dyadic analysis of adolescent friendships behaviours during pain: Comparison of those with chronic pain versus those without chronic pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Social context has been found to influence pain intensity and tolerance. The aims of this study were to determine the impact of one type of social context on the painful experiences of adolescents with and without chronic pain by examining interactions within and across friendship dyads during experimental pain. METHODS: Each adolescent in 61 same-sex friendship dyads (30 dyads with a chronic pain member) across three sites participated in the cold pressor task and acted as the observer during their friend's participation. They also completed a battery of measures to capture friendship features and pain outcomes. Pain intensity was measured using an 11-point numeric scale. Pain tolerance was measured by the length of time in the cold pressor device. Videotapes of their interactions were coded for verbal and non-verbal behaviours. A series of Actor Partner Independence Modelling, Hierarchical Multiple Regression and Multivariate Analysis of Covariance was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: Friendship features were not associated with pain intensity or tolerance. Both members of dyads with a chronic pain member used fewer non-attending behaviours when they were observing their friend resulting in participants in those dyads having lower pain tolerance. Moreover, within dyads, one's friend's behaviours when experiencing pain influenced pain tolerance but only for those dyads with a chronic pain member. CONCLUSIONS: Strategies aimed at improving social interactions for adolescents with chronic pain while they are experiencing pain are discussed. Research is needed to understand how different peer relationships influence pain tolerance in adolescents with chronic pain. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESEARCH: During pain, patterns of interactions differ within and between adolescent friendship dyads when one has chronic pain (CP) versus controls. Dyads with a CP member use fewer non-attending behaviours despite non-attending behaviours rated as more helpful. Pain intensity was solely related to the participant's behaviour. Amongst dyads with a CP member, pain tolerance was also influenced by their friend's behaviours. Friends of adolescents with pain engage in more unhelpful behaviours perhaps decreasing the ability of CP adolescents to engage in social activities.
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 | 0.032 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".