Two Brief Versions of the Multidimensional Pain Readiness to Change Questionnaire, Version 2 (MPRCQ2)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The present study sought to develop 1-item and 2-item versions of subscales from the Multidimensional Pain Readiness to Change Questionnaire, Version 2 (MPRCQ2), a measure of readiness to adopt a variety of pain management and coping strategies commonly taught in multidisciplinary treatment programs. METHODS: One hundred and ninety patients with rheumatic diseases who entered a Rheumatology Day Program completed the MPRCQ2 and an additional criterion measure, the Pain Stages of Change Questionnaire (PSOCQ), before and after treatment. First one and then a second item that best represented each MPRCQ2 scale were selected based on: (1) the correlations between the items and their parent MPRCQ2 scale; (2) responsivity to change following treatment; (3) correlations of the items with the PSOCQ scales; and (4) authors' consensus of face validity and construct representativeness of items. The psychometric properties of the 1-item and 2-item versions of the MPRCQ2 scales were then examined. RESULTS: These brief versions provided good approximations of their parent scales and 9/10 were responsive to change following multidisciplinary treatment. Correlations between the brief scales and the PSOCQ scales showed similar relationships as with the full MPRCQ2 scales. DISCUSSION: The findings support the validity of these brief versions of the MPRCQ2 subscales. We would recommend the use of these versions of the MPRCQ2 when a measure of patient readiness to use a range of pain self-management coping strategies is needed (eg, treatment process research, prediction of success in multidisciplinary treatment), but response burden is a significant issue.
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 | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".