Cited by 96Pediatric Pain Management TechniquesMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationPain Management and Treatment

Relationships Among Pain, Protective Parental Responses, and Disability for Adolescents With Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: The Mediating Role of Pain Catastrophizing

Guite, Jessica W., McCue, Rebecca L., Sherker, Jennifer L., Sherry, David D., Rose, John B.·2011·The Clinical Journal of Pain

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Children learn to cope with pain within the context of the family and parental responses to pediatric pain can impact health outcomes. The aim of this study was to examine relationships among pain, protective parental responses to pain, functional disability, and pain catastrophizing for adolescents with chronic musculoskeletal pain syndromes. METHODS: Initial evaluation records for 138 adolescents with chronic musculoskeletal pain who consulted a pediatric multidisciplinary pain management clinic were examined. Measures were collected at the time of the initial evaluation and included adolescent self-reports of their own usual pain intensity, perceived parental responses to their pain, adolescent functional disability, and pain catastrophizing. RESULTS: Pain catastrophizing was significantly correlated with pain intensity, protective parental responses to pain, and functional disability. Multiple regression analyses further suggest that pain catastrophizing serves as a mediator of relationships between: (1) pain and disability and (2) protective parenting responses and disability. Evidence supporting a significant indirect effect for pain catastrophizing on disability was found within both models through bootstrap and Sobel analyses. DISCUSSION: Pain catastrophizing seems to play an important role in understanding relationships between pain, protective parental responses, and disability for adolescents with musculoskeletal pain. Our findings suggest that strategies that help modify adolescent catastrophic pain beliefs and parental responses to pain, may help improve adolescent functioning.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/ajp.0b013e31821d8fb4

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Guite, J. W., McCue, R. L., Sherker, J. L., Sherry, D. D., & Rose, J. B.
Affiliations
Children's Hospital of Philadelphia (US)
Corresponding author
  • Guite, Jessica W.
  • McCue, Rebecca L.
  • Sherker, Jennifer L.
  • Sherry, David D.
  • Rose, John B.
Venue
The Clinical Journal of Pain
Published
2011-11
Volume
27
Issue
9
Pages
775-781
ISSN
0749-8047 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1995073331
Cited by
96
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 2
FWCI
3.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Journal of Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
Keywords
chronic musculoskeletal pain, adolescents, pain catastrophizing, functional disability, pain intensity, mediation, pediatric pain management
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adolescent, Attitude to Health, Developmental Disabilities, Disability Evaluation, Female, Humans, Male, Pain Measurement, Parent-Child Relations, Parents, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Catastrophization, Musculoskeletal Pain, Pain Management

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