Cross‐sectional evaluation of patient functioning and health‐related quality of life in patients with neuropathic pain under standard care conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: The purpose of this cross-sectional evaluation was to determine the impact of neuropathic pain (NeP) on patient functioning and Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) under standard care conditions. METHODS: Patients with NeP or neuropathic and nociceptive pain [Mixed Pain (MP)] enrolled in the DONEGA study, a naturalistic, prospective and multi-centre study of the effectiveness of gabapentin under usual care conditions, were included in this cross-sectional evaluation before starting study treatments. Participants completed the Short Form-McGill Pain Questionnaire, MOS Short Form-12 (SF-12), and Sheehan Disability Scale (ShDS). Multivariate analysis and regression models were used to analyze patient data. RESULTS: A total of 1519 patients [mean+/-SD; 56.0+/-13.7 yrs old (58.8% female)] with NeP or MP were enrolled in the study. The mean pain history was 1.1+/-2.8 yrs, current pain intensity on a 5-point visual analogue scale was 2.8+/-1.0 and mean pain in previous week was 71.3+/-19.0mm. Pain substantially interfered (i.e., score > or = 5 on 0-10 scale) with normal work (5.9+/-3.0), social life (5.7+/-3.0), and family life (5.3+/-3.0), producing substantial disability (total ShDS score of 16.9+/-8.3 pts). Country-standardised physical (PCS) and mental health (MCS) component summary scores of SF-12 indicated significant impairment in both domains compared with the general Spanish population: PCS; -1.13+/-1.0 SDS (standard deviation score), and MCS; -1.21+/-0.7 SDS, equivalent to the 15th and 25th percentiles of normative populations, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Under standard care conditions, neuropathic and mixed pain are associated with impaired physical and mental QoL, producing a substantial level of disability in these patients.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".