MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040208716 · doi:10.1097/ajp.0b013e3181850dce

Hypervigilance as Predictor of Postoperative Acute Pain: Its Predictive Potency Compared With Experimental Pain Sensitivity, Cortisol Reactivity, and Affective State

2009· article· en· W2040208716 on OpenAlexaff
Stefan Lautenbacher, Claudia Huber, Miriam Kunz, Andreas Parthum, Peter Weber, Norbert Grießinger, Reinhard Sittl

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Journal of Pain · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Pain Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHypervigilanceMedicinePotencyReactivity (psychology)AnesthesiaSensitivity (control systems)Acute painPostoperative painInternal medicinePsychiatryAnxietyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Pain hypervigilance--a strong attentional bias toward pain--is thought to accompany chronic pain and modulate pain management. Its usefulness as predisposing factor for the development and maintenance of pain has been discussed. The aim of our study was to demonstrate the predictive power of hypervigilance for the development of acute postoperative pain. METHODS: Fifty-four young male patients were assessed 1 day before surgery (correction of chest malformation) on a range of psychologic predictors. These predictors included the assessment of hypervigilance (questionnaires as the Pain Catastrophizing Scale, Pain Anxiety Symptom Scale, the Pain Vigilance and Awareness Questionnaire, and the dot-probe task) and affective state, experimental pain sensitivity, and cortisol reactivity. Acute postoperative pain was assessed by ratings of pain intensity 1 week postsurgery and through the amount of analgesics [patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA)] requested during the first days after surgery. RESULTS: Pain intensity was significantly explained (17% explained variance) by hypervigilance, whereas PCEA performance was not (10%). Adding all other predictors led to a significant increase of explained variance (35%) for pain ratings and a nonsignificant increase (19%) for PCEA. A more parsimonious solution with only heat pain threshold added led to a significant increase in explained variance (30%) for pain intensity. Hypervigilance was only moderately correlated with the other predictors. DISCUSSION: Hypervigilance proved to be a powerful predictor of subjective acute postoperative pain, but was less useful with regard to the amount of requested analgesics. The overlap with other psychologic predictors (affective state, experimental pain sensitivity, and cortisol reactivity) is sufficiently small to consider hypervigilance a promising supplement in psychologic predictor research.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.317 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations132
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Journal of PainSame topicPediatric Pain Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207