The Relationship Between Pain, Neuropsychological Performance, and Physical Function in Community-Dwelling Older Adults with Chronic Low Back Pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Chronic pain and cognitive impairment are prevalent and disabling in older adults (OA), but their interrelationship has not been rigorously tested. We did so in OA with chronic low back pain (CLBP). DESIGN: A total of 323 OA (160 pain-free, 163 CLBP; mean age 73.5 years, 45% female) had neuropsychological (NP) testing with the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status, Trail Making Test, and the Grooved Pegboard Test. Pain intensity was measured with the McGill Pain Questionnaire Short Form. Physical performance (gait speed, functional reach, chair rise, trunk rotation, and static/dynamic lifting), psychosocial disruption (Geriatric Depression Scale, the Short Form-36 Mental Health and Role Limitations-Emotional Composite scale), and self-reported disability (Functional Status Index, the Short From-36 Physical Functioning/Role-Physical Composite scale) were also measured. SETTING: Outpatient research laboratory. RESULTS: There were no group differences in age, gender, or educational level, but significant differences in NP scores (P = 0.01) were found. Five scales accounted for the differences: immediate memory (P = 0.002), language (P = 0.004), delayed memory (P = 0.04), mental flexibility (Trails B [P = 0.02]), and Grooved Pegboard (P = 0.05). NP scores were significantly correlated with physical performance (R2= 0.30, P < 0.001), but not self-reported disability (R2= 0.04, P = 0.52) or psychosocial disruption (R2= 0.05, P = 0.46). NP function was correlated with pain intensity (R2= 0.17, P < 0.001), and NP function mediated the relationship between pain and physical performance. CONCLUSIONS: OA with CLBP demonstrated impaired NP performance as compared with pain-free OA. Further, pain severity was inversely correlated with NP performance, and NP performance mediated the relationship between pain and physical performance. Future research should examine whether cognitive function and impaired physical performance can be improved with pain reduction.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".