The association between parent mental health and pediatric chronic pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: Mental health problems are common among parents of children with chronic pain and associated with worse outcomes for the child with chronic pain. However, the effect sizes of these associations between parent mental health and pediatric chronic pain vary widely across studies. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to generate pooled estimates of the (1) prevalence of mental health problems among parents of children with chronic pain and (2) associations between parent mental health and the (2a) presence of child chronic pain and (2b) functioning of children with chronic pain. Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and CINAHL were searched up to November 2022. Observational studies that examined symptoms or diagnoses of parent anxiety, depression, or general distress and the presence of child chronic pain and/or related functioning were included. From 32,848 records, 2 coders identified 49 studies to include in random-effects meta-analyses. The results revealed that mental health problems among parents of children with chronic pain were common (anxiety: 28.8% [95% CI 20.3-39.1]; depression: 20.0% [15.7-25.2]; general distress: 32.4% [22.7-44.0]). Poorer parent mental health was significantly associated with the presence of chronic pain (anxiety: OR = 1.91 [1.51-2.41]; depression: OR = 1.90 [1.51-2.38]; general distress: OR = 1.74 [1.47-2.05]) and worse related functioning (ie, pain intensity, physical functioning, anxiety and depression symptoms; r s = 0.10-0.25, all P s < 0.05) in children. Moderator analyses were generally nonsignificant or could not be conducted because of insufficient data. Findings support the importance of addressing parent mental health in the prevention and treatment of pediatric chronic 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.057 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".