Diferencias en el uso de las estrategias de afrontamiento, el catastrofismo y el estado de ánimo en función del tiempo de evolución del dolor crónico
Bibliographic record
Abstract
espanolIntroduccion: este estudio describe el dolor cronico como un estresor complejo al que la persona debe adaptarse continuamente usando diferentes estrategias. Metodo: el objetivo de esta investigacion es observar las diferencias que existen en las variables psicologicas y el uso de las estrategias de afrontamiento del dolor en funcion del tiempo de evolucion. Los instrumentos de evaluacion son: Cuestionario del Dolor (MPQ), Estrategias de Afrontamiento del Dolor Cronico (CADR), Escala Hospitalaria de Ansiedad y Depresion (HAD), Escala de Catastrofismo del (CSQ-C). Los 60 participantes del estudio son pacientes de una unidad de tratamiento especializada en el ambito hospitalario. De estos se crearon dos grupos, uno de menor tiempo de evolucion (de 1 a 5 anos) y el otro de mayor tiempo de evolucion (de mas de 13 anos). Resultados: los resultados muestran que tanto el tiempo de evolucion como la edad del paciente se asocian con el uso de una estrategia pasiva, la catarsis y la evaluacion del dolor tiene una relacion positiva con el catastrofismo, las estrategias pasivas, la ansiedad y la depresion. Mediante el analisis de la comparacion de medias de los dos grupos se confirma que el grupo de menor tiempo de evolucion hace mayor uso de la estrategia de afrontamiento catarsis y ademas presenta puntuaciones mas altas en catastrofismo en comparacion con los componentes del otro grupo. Conclusion: se observa la relacion entre del dolor y las variables psicologicas del estudio como tambien los cambios que pueden aparecer en diferentes etapas de la evolucion del dolor. EnglishIntroduction: preliminary study on the psychological variables and coping strategies in chronic pain related to duration. This study describes chronic pain as a stressor complex that the person using a coping strategies to adapt continuously. Method: the primary objective of this research observes differences in psychological variables and the use of pain coping strategies depending on the time of evolution. The assessment instruments are McGill Questionnaire (MPQ), Strategies for Coping with Chronic Pain (CADR), Hopital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HAD), Catastro-phism Scale CSQ (CSQ-C). Participants of this study are patients with chronic pain and are treated in to specialized unit. The results show that duration and patient's age are associated with the use of a passive strategy, the catharsis. The perception of pain has a positive relationship with catastrophizing, passive strategies, anxiety and depression. Results: results obtained by comparing the average of the two groups, one with 1 to 5 years of evolution, and another 13 to 33 years, show that the group of shorter duration makes greater use of the coping strategy of catharsis and it has scored higher on catastrophizing compared to another group. Conclusion: we observe the relationship between pain and psychological variables of this study and changes that may occur in different stages of duration of pain.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".