Heritability of pain catastrophizing and associations with experimental pain outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study used a twin paradigm to examine genetic and environmental contributions to pain catastrophizing and the observed association between pain catastrophizing and cold-pressor task (CPT) outcomes. Male and female monozygotic (n = 206) and dizygotic twins (n = 194) from the University of Washington Twin Registry completed a measure of pain catastrophizing and performed a CPT challenge. As expected, pain catastrophizing emerged as a significant predictor of several CPT outcomes, including cold-pressor Immersion Tolerance, Pain Tolerance, and Delayed Pain Rating. The heritability estimate for pain catastrophizing was found to be 37% with the remaining 63% of variance attributable to unique environmental influence. Additionally, the observed associations between pain catastrophizing and CPT outcomes were not found attributable to shared genetics or environmental exposure, which suggests a direct relationship between catastrophizing and experimental pain outcomes. This study is the first to examine the heritability of pain catastrophizing and potential processes by which pain catastrophizing is related to experimental pain response.
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 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 | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".