Identifying Weekly Trajectories of Pain Severity Using Daily Data From an mHealth Study: Cluster Analysis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: People with chronic pain experience variability in their trajectories of pain severity. Previous studies have explored pain trajectories by clustering sparse data; however, to understand daily pain variability, there is a need to identify clusters of weekly trajectories using daily pain data. Between-week variability can be explored by quantifying the week-to-week movement between these clusters. We propose that future work can use clusters of pain severity in a forecasting model for short-term (eg, daily fluctuations) and longer-term (eg, weekly patterns) variability. Specifically, future work can use clusters of weekly trajectories to predict between-cluster movement and within-cluster variability in pain severity. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to understand clusters of common weekly patterns as a first stage in developing a pain-forecasting model. METHODS: Data from a population-based mobile health study were used to compile weekly pain trajectories (n=21,919) that were then clustered using a k-medoids algorithm. Sensitivity analyses tested the impact of assumptions related to the ordinal and longitudinal structure of the data. The characteristics of people within clusters were examined, and a transition analysis was conducted to understand the movement of people between consecutive weekly clusters. RESULTS: Four clusters were identified representing trajectories of no or low pain (1714/21,919, 7.82%), mild pain (8246/21,919, 37.62%), moderate pain (8376/21,919, 38.21%), and severe pain (3583/21,919, 16.35%). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the 4-cluster solution, and the resulting clusters were similar to those in the main analysis, with at least 85% of the trajectories belonging to the same cluster as in the main analysis. Male participants spent longer (participant mean 7.9, 95% bootstrap CI 6%-9.9%) in the no or low pain cluster than female participants (participant mean 6.5, 95% bootstrap CI 5.7%-7.3%). Younger people (aged 17-24 y) spent longer (participant mean 28.3, 95% bootstrap CI 19.3%-38.5%) in the severe pain cluster than older people (aged 65-86 y; participant mean 9.8, 95% bootstrap CI 7.7%-12.3%). People with fibromyalgia (participant mean 31.5, 95% bootstrap CI 28.5%-34.4%) and neuropathic pain (participant mean 31.1, 95% bootstrap CI 27.3%-34.9%) spent longer in the severe pain cluster than those with other conditions, and people with rheumatoid arthritis spent longer (participant mean 7.8, 95% bootstrap CI 6.1%-9.6%) in the no or low pain cluster than those with other conditions. There were 12,267 pairs of consecutive weeks that contributed to the transition analysis. The empirical percentage remaining in the same cluster across consecutive weeks was 65.96% (8091/12,267). When movement between clusters occurred, the highest percentage of movement was to an adjacent cluster. CONCLUSIONS: The clusters of pain severity identified in this study provide a parsimonious description of the weekly experiences of people with chronic pain. These clusters could be used for future study of between-cluster movement and within-cluster variability to develop accurate and stakeholder-informed pain-forecasting tools.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,018 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».