Stressful Experiences in Childhood and Chronic Back Pain in the General Population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine if stressful experiences in childhood are associated with an increased risk of chronic back problems later in life. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study in the Canadian household population. Study participants were respondents to the first 3 cycles of the National Population Health Survey in Canada who were 18 years of age or older at baseline (n = 9552). Cases of chronic back pain during a 4-year follow-up period were ascertained with an interviewer-administered questionnaire. Stressful experiences in childhood were measured by an index consisting of 7 questions. RESULTS: In multivariate analyses, the risk of back pain was 1.17 (95% confidence interval 0.97-1.41) for 1 stressful event and 1.49 (95% confidence interval 1.21-1.84) for 2 or more events. The effect was consistent across subgroups defined by gender, socioeconomic status, and health status. Specific events associated with an increased risk included fearful experiences, prolonged hospitalization, and parental unemployment. DISCUSSION: Our study shows that persons reporting multiple stressful experiences in childhood are at increased risk of developing chronic back problems.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".