Phenotyping Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain in Male and Female Adolescents: Psychosocial Profiles, Somatosensory Profiles and Pain Modulatory Profiles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: A major limitation in treatment outcomes for chronic pain is the heterogeneity of the population. Therefore, a personalized approach to the assessment and treatment of children and adolescents with chronic pain conditions is needed. The objective of the study was to subgroup pediatric patients with chronic MSK pain that will be phenotypically different from each other based on their psychosocial profile, somatosensory function, and pain modulation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This observational cohort study recruited 302 adolescents (10-18 years) with chronic musculoskeletal pain and 80 age-matched controls. After validated self-report questionnaires on psychosocial factors were completed, quantitative sensory tests (QST) and conditioned pain modulation (CPM) were performed. RESULTS: Three psychosocial subgroups were identified: adaptive pain (n=125), high pain dysfunctional (n=115), high somatic symptoms (n=62). Based on QST, four somatosensory profiles were observed: normal QST (n=155), thermal hyperalgesia (n=98), mechanical hyperalgesia (n=34) and sensory loss (n=15). Based on CPM and temporal summation of pain (TSP), four distinct groups were formed, dysfunctional central processing group (n=27) had suboptimal CPM and present TSP, dysfunctional inhibition group (n=136) had suboptimal CPM and absent TSP, facilitation group (n=18) had optimal CPM and present TSP, and functional central processing (n=112) had optimal CPM and absent TSP. A significant association between the psychosocial and somatosensory profiles. However, no association was observed between the psychosocial or somatosensory profiles and pain modulatory profiles. CONCLUSION: Our results provide evidence that adolescents with chronic musculoskeletal pain are a heterogenous population comprising subgroups that may reflect distinct mechanisms and may benefit from different treatment approaches. The combination of screening self-reported questionnaires, QST, and CPM facilitate subgrouping of adolescents with chronic MSK pain in the clinical context and may ultimately contribute to personalized therapy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".