Validation of the Japanese Version of the Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire in Japanese Patients with Chronic Pain
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The present study aimed to develop the Japanese version of the Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ-J) and to evaluate its psychometric properties. DESIGN: Cross-sectional design. SETTING: A pain clinic, a neurosurgery unit, and an orthopedic surgery unit in one university hospital and a pain clinic in a municipal hospital. METHODS: One hundred and seventy-six participants completed study measures, which included 1) the PSEQ-J, 2) the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, 3) the Pain Catastrophizing Scale, 4) the Medical Outcome Study Short-Form 36, 5) the Pain Disability Assessment Scale, and 6) the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire. RESULTS: The PSEQ-J demonstrated adequate reliability and validity. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses showed that pain self-efficacy as measured with the PSEQ-J accounted for a significant proportion of the variance on the measures administered in the present study. The PSEQ-J was most strongly associated with social activity. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrated that the PSEQ-J has adequate psychometric properties, supporting its use in clinical and research settings and suggest that the PSEQ-J may be particularly strongly associated with more social and less physical activity.
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.
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 | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it