Pain trajectories and well‐being in children and young people with cerebral palsy: A cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To identify 5-week pain intensity trajectories and their association with physical and psychological well-being in children/young people with cerebral palsy (CP). METHOD: A cohort study was conducted with 101 Canadian children/young people with CP, of whom 49 were female, with an overall mean age of 12 years 11 months (SD 3 years 1 month), range of 8 to 18 years, and classified in any Gross Motor Function Classification System level. Self-reported pain intensity (Faces Pain Scale - Revised) was collected weekly for 5 weeks and physical and psychological well-being (KIDSCREEN-27) at baseline and 5 weeks. Statistical analyses included latent class growth and general linear models. RESULTS: All Gross Motor Function Classification System levels were represented (I = 40.6%; II = 15.8%; III = 20.8%; IV = 13.9%; V = 8.9%). Five pain intensity trajectories were identified. Three trajectories had very low (35.4%), low (32.4%), or high (4.9%) mean stable pain. Two trajectories had moderate changing pain (16.8%) and high pain decreasing to moderate levels (10.5%) respectively. Trajectory participants with stable high pain had the lowest physical well-being (adjusted β = -10.01; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -19.37 to -0.66). Those in the three trajectories with the highest mean baseline pain intensity (>3 out of 10) had the lowest psychological well-being (adjusted β = -8.27, 95% CI = -14.84 to -1.70; β = -6.74, 95% CI = -12.43 to -1.05; β = -5.82, 95% CI = -15.34 to 3.71). INTERPRETATION: Almost one-third of participants had moderate-to-high pain intensity trajectories. Membership in the higher pain intensity trajectories was associated with lower physical and psychological well-being. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: Five distinct 5-week pain intensity trajectories were identified in children/young people with cerebral palsy. Thirty-two per cent of participants had moderate-to-high pain intensity trajectories. Participants in the trajectories with higher pain intensity reported lower physical and psychological well-being.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".