MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6959641537 · doi:10.11575/prism/41523

Parent-Child Reminiscing in the Context of Procedural and Postsurgical Pediatric Pain

2023· other· en· W6959641537 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2023
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBotanical Research and Chemistry
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAlberta Children's Hospital Research InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta InnovatesKillam Trusts
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)Cognitive reframingContext (archaeology)Psychological interventionPain catastrophizingRandomized controlled trialChronic pain

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective. Children experience pain often and remember it long after painful experiences are over. Up to 25% of children remember past pain in a negatively-biased way (i.e., recalling higher levels of pain as compared to the initial pain reports) and are at risk of experiencing higher levels of pain in the future. Pain memories are malleable and can be reframed through conversations. Recent evidence demonstrated that the way parents reminisce about past pain with their children influenced how children remembered their past pain. Yet, no interventions have used parental reminiscing to change children’s memories for pain. The present dissertation aimed to develop a parent-led memory-reframing intervention that harnesses parent-child reminiscing about past pain and to examine the intervention’s efficacy to change children’s memories for pain. Methods. Three randomized controlled trials investigated whether parents can be taught to reminisce about past pain optimally to, in turn, change children’s memories for pain to be more accurate/positively-biased (i.e., recalling lower levels of pain compared to the initial reports). Additionally, the dissertation examined whether optimal parent-child reminiscing would result in lower levels of future needle pain. Parental beliefs regarding reminiscing about past pain were investigated to optimize the intervention and increase parental motivation to engage in reminiscing about past pain. Results. The parent-led memory-reframing intervention resulted in young children remembering their past post-surgical, but not needle, pain in a more accurate/positively-biased way. The intervention also changed parental reminiscing style to include optimal strategies for reframing past painful experiences. Parents rated the intervention to be feasible and highly acceptable in the context of post-surgical and needle pain. Results also demonstrated that some parental beliefs regarding reminiscing about past painful experiences may be a barrier that prevents parents from engaging in reminiscing about past pain. Conclusions. This dissertation developed and examined the efficacy of a parent-led memory-reframing intervention, a new avenue in pediatric pain management that targets children’s pain memories. The intervention was efficacious in changing how children remember their past post-surgical pain. The preliminary results warrant future large-scale trials to further examine the intervention’s potential to change children’s pain and health trajectories.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.810
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.253 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicBotanical Research and ChemistryFrench-language works237,207