Anxiety Sensitivity, Fear of Pain and Pain‐Related Disability in Children and Adolescents with Chronic Pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Converging lines of evidence suggest that anxiety sensitivity and fear of pain may be important vulnerability factors in the development of avoidance behaviours and disability in adults with chronic pain. However, these factors have not been evaluated in children with chronic pain. OBJECTIVES: To examine the relationships among anxiety sensitivity, fear of pain and pain-related disability in children and adolescents with chronic pain. METHODS: An interview and five questionnaires (Childhood Anxiety Sensitivity Index, Pain Anxiety Symptoms Scale, Functional Disability Inventory, Multidimensional Anxiety Scale for Children, and Reynolds Child or Adolescent Depression Scale) were administered to 21 children and adolescents eight to 17 years of age (mean +/- SD 14.24+/-2.21 years) who continued to experience pain an average of three years after discharge from a specialized pain clinic for children. RESULTS: Anxiety sensitivity accounted for 38.6% of the variance in fear of pain (F[1,20]=11.30; P=0.003) and fear of pain accounted for 39.9% of the variance in pain-related disability (F[1,20]=11.95; P=0.003), but anxiety sensitivity was not significantly related to pain disability (R2=0.09; P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that children with high levels of anxiety sensitivity had a higher fear of pain, which, in turn, was linked to increased pain disability. The results of this study suggest that anxiety sensitivity and fear of pain may play important and distinct roles in the processes that maintain chronic pain and pain-related disability in children.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".