The Pharmacological Treatment of Neuropathic Pain in Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) defines neuropathic pain as pain caused by a lesion or disease of the somatosensory nervous system. It is characterized as a clinical condition in which diagnostic studies reveal an underlying cause of an abnormality in the peripheral or central nervous system. Many common causes of neuropathic pain in adults are rare in children. The purpose of this focused narrative review is, to 1) provide an overview of neuropathic pain in children, 2) highlight unique considerations related to the diagnosis and mechanisms of neuropathic pain in children, and 3) perform a comprehensive analysis of the pharmacological treatments available. We emphasize that data for routine use of pharmacological agents in children with neuropathic pain are largely inferred from adult literature with little research performed on pediatric populations, yet have clear evidence of harms to pediatric patients. Based on these findings, we propose risk mitigation strategies such as utilizing topical treatments whenever possible, assessing pain phenotyping to guide drug class choice, and considering pharmaceuticals in the broader context of the multidisciplinary treatment of pediatric pain. Furthermore, we highlight important directions for future research on pediatric neuropathic pain treatment.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".