| Title |
Quality and Correlates of Peer Relationships in Youths with Chronic Pain
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Child Psychiatry & Human Development, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10578-018-0802-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Valérie La Buissonnière-Ariza, Dennis Hart, Sophie C. Schneider, Nicole M. McBride, Sandra L. Cepeda, Brandon Haney, Sara Tauriello, Shannon Glenn, Danielle Ung, Peter Huszar, Lisa Tetreault, Erin Petti, S. Parrish Winesett, Eric A. Storch |
| Abstract |
Youths with chronic pain may experience difficulties with peer relationships. We investigated the quality and correlates of peer relationships in a sample of 181 youths with chronic pain. A majority of youths were satisfied with their relationships with peers; however, levels were highly variable. Higher functional impairment and depression levels predicted lower peer relationship quality, controlling for demographic and other pain-related factors. In addition, peer relationship quality and pain severity predicted child depression and anxiety symptoms, whereas peer relationship quality only predicted anger symptoms. Relationship quality moderated the association between pain severity and functional impairment, suggesting that strong relationships with peers may buffer the effects of pain on functioning. Peer relationships seem particularly important for the adjustment and psychological well-being of youths with chronic pain. Particular attention should be given to functionally impaired and depressed children, who may be at higher risk of peer difficulties. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 54 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 19% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Unknown | 16 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 20 | 37% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Unknown | 17 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 May 2018.
All research outputs
#14,387,654
of 23,041,514 outputs
Outputs from Child Psychiatry & Human Development
#523
of 924 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,882
of 329,244 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Child Psychiatry & Human Development
#12
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,041,514 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 924 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.8. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,244 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.