MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413113215 · doi:10.1002/ejp.70102

Representation of Pain and Injury in Children's Picture Books—A Content Analysis

2025· article· en· W4413113215 on OpenAlexaff
Dur‐E‐Nayab Mehar, Sue Nichols, Abbie Jordan, G. Lorimer Moseley, Mélanie Noël, Sarah B. Wallwork

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Pain · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Pain Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersMedical Research CouncilNational Health and Medical Research CouncilUniversity of South Australia
KeywordsContent analysisRepresentation (politics)Content (measure theory)Picture booksPsychologyArtLiteratureSociologyMathematicsPolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Pain and injury experiences are common throughout childhood (e.g., minor injuries, vaccine injections) and provide important and frequent opportunities for children to learn about pain. Sociocultural contexts, such as reading picture books, may also provide critical opportunities for children to learn about pain/injury. This study aimed to investigate the representation of pain and injury in children's literature. METHODS: We systematically screened for pain/injury representations in children's picture books, freely available from public libraries in South Australia. A content analysis of pain/injury representations was conducted on all included books. RESULTS: Two hundred and fifty-four picture books were screened until 50 books with pain/injury representations were identified. There were 63 pain (i.e., subjective experience) and 43 injury (i.e., associated with tissue damage) representations. 'Minor' pains/injuries were frequently represented (n = 69; 86%), whereas 'procedural' (e.g., vaccine injections) (n = 1; 1%) and 'chronic' pain (n = 2; 3%) were not. Gender differences were observed where boy characters experienced more pain/injury incidents (n = 42; 53%) than girl characters (n = 23; 28.8%). Behavioural responses to pain/injury also differed, with girl characters being portrayed to experience more emotional responses (e.g., crying; n = 7; 77.8%) than boy characters (n = 2; 22.2%). Other characters present during pain/injury experiences were more likely to be passive bystanders (i.e., did not respond; n = 109; 59.6%) than active responders (n = 51; 27.6%) to characters experiencing pain. CONCLUSIONS: While the type of pain/injury representations in picture books seem consistent with young children's everyday pain/injury experiences (i.e., 'minor' pains/injuries), gendered stereotypes and dominant societal perspectives around pain and injury appear to be reinforced. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Shared reading of children's picture books provides an important sociocultural context for children to learn about pain and injury. In this study, we investigated how pain and injury are represented in children's picture books. We found that pain/injury incidents were consistent with young children's common pain/injury experiences; however, observing characters often lacked prosocial behaviours (e.g., helping, providing comfort) and gendered stereotypes were common. These findings have similarities to pain representations in children's popular TV/movies, speaking to the pervasiveness of these messages across children's media.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.316

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of PainSame topicPediatric Pain Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207