MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4391336930 · doi:10.1145/3613904.3642916

"It's Sink or Swim": Exploring Patients' Challenges and Tool Needs for Self-Management of Postoperative Acute Pain

2024· preprint· en· W4391336930 on OpenAlexafffund
Souleima Zghab, M. Gabrielle Pagé, Mélanie Lussier, Sylvain Bédard, Jinghui Cheng

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsCARE CanadaUniversité de MontréalPolytechnique Montréal
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsAcute painPain managementContext (archaeology)MedicineAcute careHealth careSelf-managementHealth professionalsPhysical therapyIntensive care medicinePsychologyComputer scienceAnesthesiaArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Poorly managed postoperative acute pain can have long-lasting negative impacts and pose a major healthcare issue. There is limited investigation to understand and address the unique needs of patients experiencing acute pain. In this paper, we tackle this gap through an interview study with 14 patients who recently underwent postoperative acute pain to understand their challenges in pain self-management and their need for supportive tools. Our analysis identified various factors associated with the major aspects of acute pain self-management. Together, our findings indicated that tools for supporting these patients need to carefully consider information and support delivery to adapt to rapid changes in pain experiences, offer personalized and dynamic assistance that adapts to individual situations in context, and monitor emotion when promoting motivation. Overall, our work provided valuable knowledge to address the less-investigated but highly-needed problem of designing technology for the self-management of acute pain and similar health conditions.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation→French-language works237,207→