It takes two: The relative contributions of parent versus child‐led regulatory behaviours on toddler vaccination pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Past research has established the important role of parent soothing in early childhood pain management. However, limited research has assessed children's own emerging emotion regulation strategies to reduce their pain during vaccination. The purpose of the current study was to understand the relative contributions of child-led emotion-regulation behaviours over and above parent regulatory behaviours and pre-needle distress. METHODS: Toddler-caregiver dyads were videotaped at their 12- and/or 18-month vaccinations. Videos were coded for pain-related behavioural distress, child-led regulatory behaviours (disengagement of attention, parent-focused behaviours, and physical self-soothing), and parent regulatory/soothing behaviours (distraction, physical comfort, rocking, verbal reassurance). Pre-needle distress, followed by parent regulatory behaviours, followed by child regulatory behaviours were used as hierarchical predictors of pain regulation. Two sets of models were estimated at each age, by incorporating parent and child regulatory behaviours at 1 min and 2 min post-needle, separately. RESULTS: At both ages, child-led parent-focused behaviours predicted less regulation. At 18 months, parent soothing behaviours (e.g. distraction, verbal reassurance, rocking) played a stronger role in regulation, however; the only behaviour that increased regulation was rocking. CONCLUSIONS: Measuring both parent and child regulatory behaviours was important for fully understanding pain-related distress regulation. Toddlers' use of parent-focused regulatory behaviours (e.g. proximity seeking) suggests that they signal to their parent directly when they are struggling to regulate post-needle. The only parent behaviour that supported this regulation was rocking at 18 months, suggesting a greater need to understand the sensitivity of parent behaviours post-needle. SIGNIFICANCE: To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine both parent and child regulatory behaviours following vaccination at different stages in toddlerhood. This investigation allows a deeper understanding of the dyadic nature of early childhood vaccination, as well as the evolving role of the parent through toddlerhood. Importantly, findings suggest that toddlers do not simply wait for their parents to respond to their pain post-needle and provide clear signals to show their need of support in regulation.
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 | 0.003 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".