Pain in patients with borderline personality disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD) frequently present to primary care physicians and specialists with pain problems. The aims of the current study are to (1) examine the prevalence of pain symptoms in patients with a diagnosis of BPD compared with a diagnosis of another personality disorder and (2) identify the factors that predict pain experienced in patients with BPD. METHODS: Two hundred and ninety inpatients meeting Revised Diagnostic Interview for Borderlines and DSM-III-R criteria for BPD and 72 patients who met DSM-III-R criteria for another personality disorder were assessed at baseline using semistructured interviews and self-report measures. Ratings of pain were assessed 16 years after baseline diagnosis and compared between diagnostic groups using t-tests. Regression analyses were used to identify predictors of pain among patients with BPD. RESULTS: Patients with BPD are more likely to experience pain and rate their pain as more severe than patients with other personality disorders. In multivariable regression models, there were three significant predictors of severity of pain among patients with BPD: older age, the presence of major depressive disorder, and the severity of childhood abuse other than sexual abuse. CONCLUSION: Patients with BPD report significant pain, which interferes with their lives. A focus on the management of medical and psychiatric comorbidities may improve their long-term functioning.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".