PAIN NARRATIVE AS AN EDUCATIONAL TOOL: USE OF THE MCGILL PAIN QUESTIONNAIRE IN PAIN NEUROSCIENCE EDUCATION
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION Pain is a complex and multifaceted experience, traditionally defined by the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) as “an unpleasant sensory and emotional experience associated with actual or potential tissue damage, or described in terms of such damage”1. This definition underscores the dual nature of pain as encompassing both physical-biological and mental-cognitive dimensions. Pain is commonly assessed using one-dimensional scales (e.g., NRS, VAS), which, while practical, are limited in capturing the full complexity of the pain experience. The Italian version of the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), comprising 78 descriptors divided into sensory, affective, and evaluative categories2, enables a richer characterisation of pain. Moreover, it provides patients with an opportunity for reflection and greater awareness of their pain. This context aligns with Pain Neuroscience Education (PNE), an approach that aims to educate patients by explaining the neurobiological and psychosocial underpinnings of pain. The objective of this study is to explore the use of the MPQ not only as an assessment tool but, more importantly, as an educational instrument within a PNE framework, as part of an integrated therapeutic approach that includes pharmacological and rehabilitative interventions. METHODS The MPQ was administered to 32 patients attending the Pain Therapy Unit at Taormina Hospital (ASP Messina). Participants included individuals suffering from musculoskeletal, oncological, and neuropathic pain. The MPQ was administered orally by a clinician who read the descriptors aloud, asking patients to select those most representative of their pain experience. This interactive process facilitated a semi-structured interview that accompanied the completion of the questionnaire. RESULTS During the administration of the questionnaire, many patients spontaneously expressed reflections on triggering, evocative and contextual factors of their pain. The words chosen often triggered associations with emotional events, specific memories or environmental situations. In this way, the MPQ served not only as an evaluative tool but also as an educational opportunity. These unprompted reflections represent a potential clinical benefit within the PNE framework: by contextualising pain, patients begin to reinterpret their experience not only in sensory terms but also cognitively and emotionally. The identification of triggers is not limited to pathophysiological mechanisms but frequently involves personal meanings, thereby promoting a deeper awareness of pain’s multidimensional nature. CONCLUSIONS The integration of the MPQ within a relational and guided context proved to be useful not only for qualitative pain assessment but also for stimulating patient awareness and reflective processing. This approach aligns well with the principles of PNE, facilitating a broader understanding of pain from a biopsychosocial perspective. The findings suggest that the dialogical use of the MPQ may serve as a valuable educational tool within a comprehensive therapeutic pathway that includes pharmacological and rehabilitative interventions. Further research is warranted to evaluate its impact on clinical pain management.
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 | 0,003 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 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 ».