Chronic Pain and Posttraumatic Stress Symptoms in Litigating Motor Vehicle Accident Victims
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: There has been little research examining chronic pain and posttraumatic stress symptoms in persons injured in motor vehicle accidents. The purpose of this study was to evaluate differences in physical injury and impairment, psychological distress, and pain coping strategies in litigating chronic pain patients low and high in motor vehicle accident-related posttraumatic stress symptoms. DESIGN: A total of 160 consecutive chronic pain patients referred for psychological-legal assessment underwent semistructured interview and testing. The testing battery included the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2, the Multidimensional Pain Inventory, the Sickness Impact Profile, and the Coping Strategies Questionnaire. Using the sample-specific median split of 18 posttraumatic stress symptoms on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 Posttraumatic Stress Disorder scale, chronic pain patients were categorized as evidencing low or high levels of posttraumatic stress symptoms. RESULTS: The findings indicate that participants evidencing high posttraumatic stress symptoms had more physical impairment, psychological distress, and maladaptive pain coping strategies and were more likely to be treated with antidepressants, other medications, and psychological management than participants evidencing low posttraumatic stress symptoms. A discriminant function analysis was performed using the full combination of physical injury and impairment, psychological distress, and pain coping variables in the prediction of posttraumatic stress symptom-defined group membership. The resulting discriminant function accounted for 61% of the between-group variance and correctly classified 92% of participants who were low in posttraumatic stress symptoms and 88% of participants who were high in posttraumatic stress symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Chronic pain and posttraumatic stress symptoms in litigating motor vehicle accident victims are associated with increased physical and psychological morbidity.
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 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 | 0.014 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".