Distress and Resilience Narratives within Pain Memories of Adolescents and Young Adults with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome: A Multi-Method Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A comprehensive understanding of pain memories requires consideration of risk and resilience factors across biopsychosocial domains. Previous research has typically focused on pain-related outcomes, largely ignoring the nature and context of pain memories. Using a multiple-method approach, this study explores the content and context of pain memories in adolescents and young adults with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS). Recruited via social media and pain-related organizations, participants completed an autobiographical pain memory task. Two-step cluster analysis was conducted on the pain memory narratives of adolescents and young adults with CRPS (n=50) using a modified version of the Pain Narrative Coding Scheme. Narrative profiles generated from the cluster analysis subsequently guided a deductive thematic analysis. Cluster analysis identified two narrative profiles of Distress and Resilience, with the role of coping and positive affect emerging as important profile predictors across pain memories. Subsequent deductive thematic analysis, utilizing Distress and Resilience codes, demonstrated the complex interplay between affect, social, and coping domains. Findings highlight the importance of applying a biopsychosocial framework to pain memory research, accounting for both risk and resilience perspectives and encourage the use of multiple method approaches to improve understanding of autobiographic pain memories. Clinical implications of reframing and recontextualizing pain memories and narratives are discussed, and the importance of exploring the origins of pain and possible application to developing resilience-based, preventative interventions is highlighted. PERSPECTIVE: Using multiple methods, this paper presents a comprehensive account of pain memories in adolescents and young adults with CRPS. Study findings promote the importance of adopting a biopsychosocial approach to examining both risk and resilience factors in understanding autobiographical pain memories in the context of pediatric pain.
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 | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".