Unique associations of pain frequency and pain-related worry with health-related quality of life in survivors of childhood cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Pain is common during childhood cancer treatment, can persist into survivorship, and can negatively affect health-related quality of life in survivors of childhood cancers (SCCs). Objective: The objective of this brief report was to assess pain frequency, pain-related worry, and their (unique) associations with health-related quality of life in SCCs. Methods: age: 17.67 years, range 8-25 years) completed self-report measures of pain frequency, pain-related worry, and health-related quality of life. Results: More than two-thirds (70%) of SCCs reported pain in the previous month (M = 1.39, SD = 1.17), and 15% reported experiencing pain often or almost always. More than one-third (39%) reported worrying about pain as a sign of cancer recurrence (M = 0.73, SD = 1.07), and 9% reported worrying about pain a lot or a whole lot. In multivariate regression models that controlled for sex, age at diagnosis, and time off treatment, both pain frequency and pain-related worry were significantly associated with physical health-related quality of life, indicating that they contribute unique variance to health-related quality of life after childhood cancer. For emotional health-related quality of life, pain frequency was no longer a significant predictor once pain-related worry was added to the model, indicating that pain-related worry may be particularly important for understanding emotional health-related quality of life. Conclusion: Postcancer pain may contribute to health-related quality of life through multiple mechanisms, including by triggering concerns of recurrence. There is a need for clinical interventions that target both the frequency of pain (eg, behavioral interventions) and pain-related worry (eg, psychoeducation and cognitive interventions) to improve health-related quality of life after childhood cancer.
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 | 0.042 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".