Integrating individuals with chronic pain in health professions education: assessing current involvement practices and achieving consensus on target content for pain education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: More than seven million Canadians live with chronic pain, yet health professionals across the country are often inadequately prepared to care for them.Recent calls to improve how Health Professions Education (HPE), meaning the education of students in a health professions program, addresses pain have highlighted the need to improve pain education by integrating people living with pain in HPE.One of the current gaps in pain education is that HPE students lack a comprehensive understanding of the experience of living with pain.Unfortunately, there has been very little research examining what people living with pain think HPE students should learn about the lived experience.Filling this gap is essential, given that effective pain healthcare relies on health professionals understanding the lived experience of pain, as a foundation for partnership with patients.Furthermore, it remains unclear how people living with pain are currently involved in HPE across different universities and programs, despite the calls to integrate them in pain education.This thesis aims to address these gaps by 1) assessing the current involvement of people living with pain across different HPE programs and 2) building consensus among people living with pain regarding what health professionals should learn about their lived experience.Study #1: Assessing how people living with pain are involved in health professions pain education Aims: The primary objective of Study #1 was to assess the extent to which people living with pain are involved in pain education across HPE programs.Methods: A survey was distributed to pain educators, receiving responses from 35 participants.The survey included questions about the involvement of people living with pain in their teaching, the specifics of their List of Abbreviations HPE -Health Professions Education, with respect to pain education for pre-licensure health professionals, such as students studying in medicine, nursing, physical therapy, or occupational therapy, among others Manuscript #1: Assessing how people living with pain are involved in health professions pain education
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 | 0.020 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".