Catastrophizing and Perceived Injustice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief Study Design. The article will summarize research that has supported the role of pain catastrophizing and perceived injustice as risk factors for problematic recovery after whiplash injury. Objective. This article focuses on two psychological variables that have been shown to impact on recovery trajectories after whiplash injury; namely pain catastrophizing and perceived injustice. Summary of Background Data. Research has shown that psychological variables play a role in determining the trajectory of recovery after whiplash injury. Methods. This article will focus on two psychological variables that have been shown to impact on recovery trajectories after whiplash injury; namely pain catastrophizing and perceived injustice. The article will summarize research that has supported the role of pain catastrophizing and perceived injustice as risk factors for problematic recovery after whiplash injury. Results. Several investigations have shown that measures of catastrophizing and perceived injustice prospectively predict problematic trajectories of recovery after whiplash injury. Basic research points to the potential roles of expectancies, attention, coping and endogenous opioid dysregulation as possible avenues through which catastrophizing might heighten the probability of the persistence of pain after whiplash injury. Although research has yet to systematically address the mechanisms by which perceived injustice might contribute to prolonged disability in individuals with whiplash injuries, there are grounds for suggesting the potential contributions of catastrophizing, pain behavior and anger. Conclusion. A challenge for future research will be the development and evaluation of risk factor–targeted interventions aimed at reducing catastrophizing and perceived injustice to improve recovery trajectories after whiplash injury. Numerous investigations have shown that measures of catastrophizing and perceived injustice prospectively predict problematic recovery trajectories after whiplash injury. A challenge for future research will be the development and evaluation of risk factor-targeted interventions aimed at reducing catastrophizing and perceived injustice to improve recovery trajectories after whiplash injury.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.002 |
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".