MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7033059681

Painful decisions: an exploration of pain assessment (from the perspective of others) within a signal detection theory framework

2013· dissertation· en· W7033059681 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMary Immaculate Research Repository (Mary Immaculate College) · 2013
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicColeoptera Taxonomy and Distribution
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVignetteHealth carePerspective (graphical)Pain assessmentDistressNormativeCategorizationClinical judgement
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pain perception is individualistic, subjective and difficult to assess and measure accurately. It is vital for the implementation of appropriate treatment strategies, that healthcare providers and receivers arrive at a similar pain assessment when evaluating a pain experience. The benefits that accrue from mutually derived pain assessment cannot be overstated. These include patients’ well being, appropriate patient care and support, enhanced cost effectiveness of health care systems, and more efficient deployment of available resources. The primary aim of this research is to develop and assess the use of a pain detection and measurement tool within a social communication framework based on Craig’s 2009 Social Communication Model of Pain. The proposed pain detection/measurement tool integrates vignette methodology with a Signal Detection Theory (SDT) framework. The objective is to help explain the under and over estimation of pain commonly observed between healthcare receivers (i.e. patients, individuals etc. who experience pain) and healthcare providers (health practitioners, doctors, nurses, families, carers etc). Existing pain measurement instruments fail to accommodate the social interaction between these two parties. A convenience sample of 660 (i.e. undergraduates n =579; those who have chosen to work in healthcare aka student nurses n =81) judged four pain levels (no pain, mild, moderate and severe pain) experienced by characters depicted in a vignette series that incorporated pain descriptors from McGill Pain Questionnaire (Melzack, 1970) and pain indicators associated with Kehoe et al’s (2007) ‘profile of pain’, (e.g. the distress of pain, physical pain, its influence on suffers, etc). Pain judgement data was subjected to inferential and
\nSDT analysis. Significant differences were found between groups in their criterion adopted in their pain perception at all levels and between the response-spread across the pain rating scale. Age and gender of characters depicted in vignettes were also found to influence pain judgements differently between groups. Student nurses’ criteria in their pain detection were lower in the no pain condition and higher in the moderate and severe pain condition compared to undergraduates. SDT analysis identified student nurses’ higher pain detection rates compared to undergraduates across mild, moderate and severe pain levels. Differences in willingness to report pain where there were no pain descriptors/indicators were also observed. Benefits of vignettes in clinical settings where both healthcare providers and receivers respond to a similar pain experience are explored. Results fuel a discussion of the use of SDT as an alternative framework for pain detection, assessment and measurement.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.525
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMary Immaculate Research Repository (Mary Immaculate College)Same topicColeoptera Taxonomy and DistributionFrench-language works237,207