Are pain beliefs, cognitions, and behaviors influenced by race, ethnicity, and culture in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain : a systematic review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Chronic pain has been considered as a biopsychosocial condition in which cognitive and emotional factors as well as biological factors significantly affect perception of pain. Race, ethnicity and culture have a crucial impact on illness beliefs, health care preferences, help-seeking behaviors, and acceptance of medical interventions. Objectives: The aim of the present study was to systematically review the current evidence regarding the racial, ethnic and cultural alterations and differences in pain beliefs, cognitions, and behaviors in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain (MSKP). Study Design: Systematic review. Methods: This systematic review was conducted and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines (PRISMA). PubMed and Web of Science were searched. A first screening was conducted based on title and abstract of the articles. In the second screening, full-texts of the remaining articles were evaluated for the fulfilment of the inclusion criteria. The risk of bias was assessed with the modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Results: A total of 11 articles were included. The methodological quality of the included studies ranged from low to moderate. There is moderate evidence that African-Americans use more praying, hoping, and emotion-focused coping strategies than Caucasians. There is also preliminary evidence regarding the differences in some coping strategies such as distraction, catastrophizing, and problem-focused solving between African-Americans and Caucasians. Preliminary evidence exists regarding the differences in pain coping strategies between the US and Portugal; the US and Singapore; and among 4 French-speaking countries. It is found that Spanish patients with fibromyalgia (FM) have more negative illness perceptions than Dutch patients. There is preliminary evidence that Caucasians have higher self-efficacy than African-Americans. There is also preliminary evidence that New Zealanders have more internal health expectancies than patients from the US. Preliminary evidence is demonstrated that Caucasians with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have more positive control beliefs than African-Americans. Lastly, there is preliminary evidence that patients from the US believe that they are more disabled, while Singaporeans interpret the pain more by a traditional biomedical perspective. Limitations: Only 11 articles were included. The small number of articles, wide range of assessment methods, and substantial risk of bias in the included studies led the investigator to draw conclusions cautiously. Conclusion: Preliminary to moderate evidence shows the differences in coping strategies, illness perceptions, self-efficacy, fear avoidance beliefs, locus of control, and pain attitudes in different populations. Further prospective and longitudinal studies using standard definitions for race, ethnicity or culture and valid questionnaires for each population are warranted to explore the racial, ethnic and cultural discrepancies in pain beliefs, cognitions, and behaviours.
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 | 0,008 | 0,039 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,008 | 0,010 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,006 | 0,008 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 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 ».