MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063119638 · doi:10.1097/ajp.0b013e31804ac020

Frequency and Priority of Pain Patients' Health Care Use

2007· article· en· W2063119638 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Von Korff, Elizabeth Lin, Joshua J. Fenton, Kathleen Saunders

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Journal of Pain · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsCentre for Family Medicine
FundersNational Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research
KeywordsMedicinePsychosocialHealth careDiseaseChronic painPhysical therapyInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Increased health care use by pain patients is largely due to conditions other than their identified pain condition, but the kinds of services accounting for increased service use are poorly understood. This study assesses reasons for health care visits of pain patients versus controls, and compares characteristics of pain patients who differ in frequency and priority of service use. METHODS: The study samples included consecutive, primary care back pain (N=807), headache (N=831), and temporomandibular disorder pain (N=372) patients who were interviewed by telephone. Subsequently, age-sex matched controls with a primary care visit in the 6 months before the matched case's pain visit were identified. Over the following 3 years, diagnostic codes for health care visits were classified based on the Oregon Prioritized List of Health Services and case-control differences in major classes of care were compared. Pain patients differing in frequency and priority of service use were compared on measures of pain severity, chronicity, and psychosocial dysfunction. RESULTS: Pain patients' increased health care use was sustained over 3 years. Increased utilization was largely due to symptomatic and ill-defined conditions, lower priority chronic disease, lower and higher priority acute disease, and mental health care. About one-half of the pain patients (vs. one-third of the controls) were frequent health care users. About one-third of the pain patients (vs. one-sixth of the controls) were frequent users who predominantly used medical care for lower priority conditions, and this difference accounted for most of the case-control difference in the prevalence of high users. Pain patients with frequent health care use had more severe pain and greater psychosocial dysfunction than pain patients with less frequent health care use. Among frequent users, pain patients who predominantly used services for lower priority conditions did not differ on measures of pain severity, chronicity, or somatization when compared with frequent users who typically used services for higher priority conditions. CONCLUSIONS: The kind of problems explaining heightened service use of pain patients is more varied and complex than previously understood. These results call for increased attention to the implications of health care providers responding to presenting complaints as if each were a unique problem, without bringing continuity or an integrating perspective to patients' overall experience and management of illness.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.143
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.014
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.360 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations62
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Journal of PainSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207