Factor structure and psychometric properties of the Pain Anxiety Symptoms Scale‐20 in a community physiotherapy clinic sample
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The PASS-20 was developed to assess pain-related anxiety among a variety of pain populations. This measure was constructed by extracting 20 items from its 40-item parent measure (PASS). Initial studies of the PASS-20 suggest that the psychometric properties have been preserved. The purpose of the present study extended this research and explored the factor structure of the PASS-20, and its reliability and validity in a sample of pain patients receiving treatment in a community physiotherapy clinic. Patients with current pain (n = 201) were asked to complete a battery of self-report measures related to the experience of pain on two separate occasions (3-month interval). Results of principal components analyses suggested that a 4-factor solution representing fear of pain, escape-avoidance, physiological symptoms, and cognitive symptoms of anxiety provided the best fit to these data. Results also showed that the total and subscale scores of the PASS-20 have good reliability (internal consistency, test-retest) and validity (construct) correlating greater with other conceptually similar measures than distinct constructs. These results suggest that this measure has good utility for both clinical and research applications. Directions for future evaluation are also discussed.
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.
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 | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it