“We survived the pandemic together”: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Canadian families living with chronic pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Pediatric chronic pain is a significant problem in Canada, affecting one in five youth. This study describes the impact of the pandemic on the experiences of Canadian families living with chronic pain through interviews with youth living with chronic pain, parents, and siblings. Methods: Employing a qualitative descriptive design, in-depth semistructured interviews were completed with Canadian youth living with pain, as well as parents and siblings. Participants were not required to be related. Interviews were analyzed using a reflexive thematic analysis approach. Results: Forty-four interviews were completed with 14 parents, 19 youth with chronic pain, and 11 siblings from across the country. Three key themes were developed: (1) absorbing and shifting: the toll of the pandemic on the family system (e.g., loss of coping mechanisms, shifting roles to respond to the pandemic), (2) social ambiguity and abandonment (e.g., social sacrifice and abandonment by the health care system), and (3) building community resilience: familial adaptation to the pandemic (e.g., family cohesion, confidence, and self-management). Discussion/Conclusions: Youth, parents, and siblings reported that the pandemic impacted coping strategies across the family system. These results outline the challenges youth experienced managing their pain and overall health throughout the pandemic and the resilience built within families during this time. Going forward, it would be relevant to examine how racialized and structurally marginalized youth with chronic pain and their families experienced the pandemic. Future research should examine how unexpected benefits of the pandemic (e.g., increased confidence and self-management) may be sustained into the future.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".