Cited by 34Pediatric Pain Management TechniquesProblem Solving Skills DevelopmentFamily and Disability Support Research

A Single-Arm Feasibility Trial of Problem-Solving Skills Training for Parents of Children with Idiopathic Chronic Pain Conditions Receiving Intensive Pain Rehabilitation

Open access
Law, Emily F., Fales, Jessica L., Beals-Erickson, Sarah E., Failo, Alessandro, Logan, Deirdre, Randall, Edin, Weiss, Karen, Durkin, Lindsay +1 more·2016·Journal of Pediatric Psychology

Abstract

Objective: To adapt problem-solving skills training (PSST) for parents of children receiving intensive pain rehabilitation and evaluate treatment feasibility, acceptability, and satisfaction. Methods: Using a prospective single-arm case series design, we evaluated the feasibility of delivering PSST to 26 parents (84.6% female) from one of three pediatric pain rehabilitation programs. Results: Parents completed four to six sessions of PSST delivered during a 2-4-week period. A mixed-methods approach was used to assess treatment acceptability and satisfaction. We also assessed changes in parent mental health and behavior outcomes from pretreatment to immediate posttreatment and 3-month follow-up. Parents demonstrated excellent treatment adherence and rated the intervention as highly acceptable and satisfactory. Preliminary analyses indicated improvements in domains of mental health, parenting behaviors, health status, and problem-solving skills. Conclusions: Findings demonstrate the potential role of psychological interventions directed at reducing parent distress in the context of intensive pediatric pain rehabilitation.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/jpepsy/jsw087

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Psychological interventions focused on reducing parent distress were effective.

    “Recent work has been done to adapt problem-solving skills training (PSST), which teaches parents structured approaches to solving problems and targets parent distress, with results demonstrating that psychological interventions focused on reducing parent distress were effective [41,42].”

    From Best-evidence for the rehabilitation of chronic pain part 1: Pediatric pain (2019) · cites this paper as [41]

    The Mental Health Composite results report significant improvements in parents’ mental health after treatment and at follow-up. But the Discussion says this single-arm feasibility trial cannot establish whether PSST caused those improvements, so its results do not demonstrate that the intervention was effective. No page number was provided in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 31 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Derogatis, L. R. (2001). Brief symptom inventory (BSI-18): Administration, scoring and procedures manual. Minneapolis, MN: NCS Pearson.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Law, E. F., Fales, J. L., Beals-Erickson, S. E., Failo, A., Logan, D., Randall, E., Weiss, K., Durkin, L., & Palermo, T. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Washington State University Vancouver (US)
  • University of Trento (IT)
  • Boston Children's Hospital (US)
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • Seattle Children's Research Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Law, Emily F.
Venue
Journal of Pediatric Psychology
Published
2016-10-15
Volume
42
Issue
4
Pages
jsw087
ISSN
  • 0146-8693 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-735X
OpenAlex
W2531694536
Cited by
33
References
31
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1
FWCI
4.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Pediatric Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Seattle Children's Research Institute
  • Children’s Hospital of Wisconsin Research Institute
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Center for Child Health, Behavior and Development
  • National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (K08HD060067, K24HD060068)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Speech and Hearing › Problem Solving Skills Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Family and Disability Support Research
Keywords
problem-solving training, parent training, pediatric chronic pain, parental mental health, parental behavior, treatment feasibility, treatment acceptability, parental distress
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Child, Education, Nonprofessional, Feasibility Studies, Female, Humans, Male, Parents, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Problem Solving, Prospective Studies, Stress, Psychological, Parenting, Treatment Outcome, Patient Satisfaction, Chronic Pain

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review