MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391329386 · doi:10.26443/ijwpc.v11i1.412

Resilience in adolescent chronic pain: an exploration of coping mechanisms and personal growth

2024· article· en· W4391329386 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Rachel Szwimer, Richard Hovey

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Whole Person Care · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Pain Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoping (psychology)Resilience (materials science)Chronic painPersonal developmentPsychologyClinical psychologyPsychotherapistMedicinePsychiatryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adolescents living with chronic pain (CP) are vulnerable to negative outcomes such as disability and impaired quality of life. They often miss opportunities for social engagement and suffer from anxiety and depression. Central to all accounts is a sense of interrupted life—phrases with negative connotations such as “couldn’t do” and “had to stop” are repeatedly used to express feelings of loss of control.
 To regain control over their situation, participants create within themselves a positive internal dialogue whereby they reconstruct the meaning of normalcy, practice acceptance, make downward social comparisons, and engage in daily positive affirmations. They also create a positive external environment, surrounding themselves with compassionate individuals as well as advocating for proper accommodations at school. While CP disrupts their personal and academic trajectories, the experience of living with pain has instilled in them the pursuit of significance.
 This pursuit is propelled by the imagery of a fulfilled life and seems to be particular to this age group. Ironically, some participants are grateful for their pain for granting them intuitive empathy for the suffering of others and the emotional credibility to help others.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.503
Threshold uncertainty score0.323

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Whole Person CareSame topicPediatric Pain Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207