MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408857222 · doi:10.1002/pne2.70003

Chest Pain in Children: Is It Another “Growing Pain”?

2025· review· en· W4408857222 on OpenAlexaff
M Kassab, Abhay Katyal, Sonia Franciosi, Shubhayan Sanatani

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatric and Neonatal Pain · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStreptococcal Infections and Treatments
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChest painMedicineSomatizationPhysical therapyPhysical examinationEtiologyIntensive care medicinePsychological interventionTendernessAnxietyPsychiatrySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chest pain is a common complaint among children that has a non-cardiac origin in 99% of pediatric cases. We conducted a literature review of the different proposed etiologies of pediatric chest pain, as well as the evidence base supporting current approaches. Among the non-cardiac causes of chest pain in children, musculoskeletal causes are reported to be the most prevalent. This includes precordial catch syndrome, Tietze's syndrome, and costochondritis. However, these origins of musculoskeletal chest pain were described historically, and their labels are likely applied too broadly. It is important that providers be able to differentiate between benign chest pain that truly has a musculoskeletal origin and that which lacks an identifiable cause. To determine the cause of chest pain, providers should take a detailed history, physical examination, electrocardiogram, and any additional indicated laboratory tests. Musculoskeletal chest pain should only be diagnosed if there is an objective finding of reproducible tenderness during the physical examination or if there is a plausible history. If no cause can be identified, the chest pain may be linked to somatization. As a result, these patients may benefit from psychiatric evaluation and mindfulness-based interventions. To better inform clinical care, providers should be aware of these emerging management approaches.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.277 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatric and Neonatal PainSame topicStreptococcal Infections and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207