Chronic pain and the interpersonal theory of suicide.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Chronic pain is a known risk factor for suicide. To date, however, few studies of people with chronic pain have tested specific predictions about suicidal ideation that are derived from theory. The interpersonal theory of suicide proposes that the psychological constructs of thwarted belongingness and perceived burdensomeness are unique and independent precursors to suicidal ideation. We tested this hypothesis in a clinical sample of patients with chronic pain. METHOD: A total of 303 patients of a chronic pain rehabilitation program completed measures of pain severity, duration, and disability; cognitive-affective measures of depression and catastrophizing; and interpersonal measures of relationship distress and self-perceived burden to others. The latter measures were included as indices of the belongingness and burdensomeness constructs. Participants also rated two items pertaining to suicidal ideation. RESULTS: In a multiple regression analysis, both distress in interpersonal relations (β = 0.12, p = .037) and self-perceived burden to others (β = 0.25, p < .001) were significant predictors of suicidal ideation, even after adjusting statistically for demographic characteristics, pain severity and duration, functional limitations, catastrophizing, and depression. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that the interpersonal theory is relevant to understanding elevated rates of suicidal ideation among people with chronic pain, and may have broader applicability to other populations with chronic illness or disability.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".