MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1910977431 · doi:10.1155/2002/579425

Disrupted Sleep Patterns and Daily Functioning in Patients with Chronic Pain

2002· article· en· W1910977431 on OpenAlexaff
Lance M. McCracken, Grant L. Iverson

Bibliographic record

VenuePain Research and Management · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChronic painSleep (system call)MedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyPhysical therapyClinical psychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the role of disturbed sleep in the daily functioning of persons with chronic pain. subjects and METHODS: Participants comprised 287 patients seeking treatment for chronic pain at a university pain clinic. All patients completed the measures employed in the present study as part of a comprehensive initial evaluation. RESULTS: Descriptive analyses showed that 88.9% of patients reported as least one problem with disturbed sleep. Correlation analyses showed that greater sleep disturbance was associated with greater pain, disability, depression and physical symptoms, and less daily uptime. Hierarchical regression analyses showed that sleep disturbance predicted disability, daily uptime and physical symptoms independent of pain or depression. CONCLUSIONS: Sleep disruption is usually considered to be a consequence of the pain experience. However, the results of the present study reinforce the view that sleep disturbance may have a bidirectional relation with other features of chronic pain. Future studies should confirm that repairing disrupted sleep leads to an improvement in patients' daily activity and a reduction in their suffering.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations250
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePain Research and ManagementSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207