MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pain and development: interacting phenomena

2024· review· en· W4403384343 on OpenAlexaff
Katelynn E. Boerner, Neil L. Schechter, Tim F. Oberlander

Bibliographic record

VenuePain · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Pain Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyContext (archaeology)Chronic painEarly childhoodAnxietyAutismPerspective (graphical)CognitionMoodClinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: For decades, clinicians and researchers have observed bidirectional relationships between child development and the pain experience in childhood. Pain in childhood is an inherently developmental phenomenon, embedded in an iterative, time-dependent process that reflects individual biological, behavioral, social, psychological, and environmental characteristics that unfold across the early life span. Childhood pain can have wide ranging effects on brain development in ways that contribute-for better and worse-to social, emotional, and cognitive well-being in childhood and on into adulthood. Atypical trajectories of development in the context of disorders such as autism, cerebral palsy, ADHD, and mood/anxiety disorders also contribute to unique childhood pain experiences. In this paper, pain will be considered as a determinant of development, and conversely development will be considered as a key determinant of a child's pain experience. We will discuss how intersectional identities (eg, gender, race, socioeconomic status) and associated social, structural, systemic, and physical environments influence the relationship between development and pain. Finally, we will identify what might be needed to think "developmentally" in ways that extend from the "bench side" in the lab to the "curb side" in the community, integrating a developmental perspective into research and clinical practice to achieve health accessibility and equity in pain care for all children across the developmental spectrum.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePainSame topicPediatric Pain Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207