Psychologically Based Occupational Rehabilitation: The Pain-Disability Prevention Program
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
OBJECTIVES: To describe the development, implementation, and preliminary outcome of the Pain-Disability Prevention (PDP) Program. The PDP Program is a 10-week cognitive-behavioral intervention program that aims to increase daily involvement in goal-directed activity and minimize psychological barriers to activity involvement after occupational injury. Workers' Compensation Board claimants with soft tissue injuries to the back, who were still off work 6 weeks after injury and showed evidence of at least one "yellow flag," were offered participation in the PDP Program. DESIGN: A single-group, prospective treatment outcome analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Data from the first 104 claimants who participated in the PDP Program are summarized. RESULTS: Participation in the PDP Program was associated with a 60% success rate, where success was defined as return to work (45%) or readiness to return to work (15%). Initial scores on measures of catastrophizing, fear of movement/reinjury, and depression afforded 92% correct classification of treatment outcome. Early treatment changes in catastrophizing and fear of movement/reinjury were also predictive of treatment outcome. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that a psychologically based activity mobilization program can be an effective means of yielding reductions in psychological risk factors for occupational disability. Challenges to program implementation, fidelity to protocol, and issues related to cost efficacy are 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 | 0.042 | 0.069 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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