MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4388900097 · doi:10.3390/jcm12237233

The Calm after the Storm: A State-of-the-Art Review about Recommendations Put Forward during the COVID-19 Pandemic to Improve Chronic Pain Management

2023· review· en· W4388900097 on OpenAlexafffund
Marimée Godbout-Parent, Tristan Spilak, M. Gabrielle Pagé, Manon Choinière, Lise Dassieu, Gwenaëlle De Clifford‐Faugère, Anaïs Lacasse

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalUniversité du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversité de Montréal
KeywordsCINAHLMedicinePsycINFOPsychosocialPandemicMEDLINEHealth careChronic painInclusion (mineral)Public healthNursingPsychiatryCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)DiseasePsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought its fair share of consequences. To control the transmission of the virus, several public health restrictions were put in place. While these restrictions had beneficial effects on transmission, they added to the pre-existing physical, psychosocial, and financial burdens associated with chronic pain, and made existing treatment gaps, challenges, and inequities worse. However, it also prompted researchers and clinicians to seek out possible solutions and expedite their implementation. This state-of-the-art review focuses on the concrete recommendations issued during the COVID-19 pandemic to improve the health and maintain the care of people living with chronic pain. The search strategy included a combination of chronic pain and pandemic-related terms. Four databases (Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and PubMed) were searched, and records were assessed for eligibility. Original studies, reviews, editorials, and guidelines published in French or in English in peer-reviewed journals or by recognized pain organizations were considered for inclusion. A total of 119 articles were analyzed, and over 250 recommendations were extracted and classified into 12 subcategories: change in clinical practice, change in policy, continuity of care, research avenues to explore, group virtual care, health communications/education, individual virtual care, infection control, lifestyle, non-pharmacological treatments, pharmacological treatments, and social considerations. Recommendations highlight the importance of involving various healthcare professionals to prevent mental health burden and emergency overload and emphasize the recognition of chronic pain. The pandemic disrupted chronic pain management in an already-fragile ecosystem, presenting a unique opportunity for understanding ongoing challenges and identifying innovative solutions. Numerous recommendations were identified that are relevant well beyond the COVID-19 crisis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.063
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.063
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.004
Bibliometrics0.0190.022
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.241
GPT teacher head0.574
Teacher spread0.333 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine→Same topicCOVID-19 and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→