MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389080280 · doi:10.1097/pr9.0000000000001109

Application of PainDETECT in pediatric chronic pain: how well does it identify neuropathic pain and its characteristics?

2023· article· en· W4389080280 on OpenAlex
Courtney W. Hess, Amanda R Van Orden, Giulia Mesaroli, Jennifer Stinson, David Borsook, Laura E. Simons

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePAIN Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineNeuropathic painPopulationPhysical therapyAllodyniaBack painInternal medicineHyperalgesiaNociceptionPathologyAnesthesiaReceptorAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: Neuropathic pain (NP) arises from nerve damage or disease, and when not defined, it can impair function and quality of life. Early detection allows for interventions that can enhance outcomes. Diagnosis of NP can be difficult if not properly evaluated. PainDETECT is a NP screening tool developed and successfully used in adults. Objectives: We evaluated the validity of painDETECT in a pediatric population. Methods: Adolescents and young adults (10–19 years old) completed painDETECT and quantitative sensory testing (QST), which assessed mechanical allodynia and hyperalgesia, common symptoms of NP. Pain diagnoses, including neuropathic pain (n = 10), were collected through documentation in the medical chart. Descriptive statistics were used to examine age, gender, pain diagnoses, and painDETECT scores. Kruskal–Wallis H tests were conducted to examine differences in QST results across painDETECT categorizations. Results: Youth with chronic pain (N = 110, M age = 15.08 ± 2.4 years, N female = 88) and peers without pain (N = 55, M age = 15.84 ± 3.9 years, N female = 39) completed the painDETECT. The painDETECT scores for youth with pain (M = 12.7 ± 6.76) were significantly higher than those for peers without pain (M = 2.05 ± 2.41). PainDETECT demonstrated 80% sensitivity and 33% specificity in a pediatric population. Individuals who screened positively on the PainDETECT had significantly higher mechanical allodynia (M = 0.640 ± 0.994) compared with those who screened negatively (M = 0.186 ± 0.499; P = 0.016). Conclusion: PainDETECT demonstrated the ability to screen for NP, and QST mechanical allodynia results were consistent with a positive NP screen. Results of the study offer preliminary support for the ongoing assessment of the painDETECT as a brief, inexpensive, and simple-to-use screening tool for pediatric patients with primary pain complaints.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.732

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.248 · 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