MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Differential Effects Of An Education And Exercise Program In Individuals With Low And High Chronic Pain

2010· article· en· W2092720143 on OpenAlexaff
Cheryl E. King‐VanVlack, Ruth Dubin

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysical therapyRuminationMedicinePain catastrophizingChronic painLearned helplessnessDepression (economics)CognitionClinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Throughout 2006-2008, individuals with chronic pain registered for a 10-12 week community-based education and exercise program developed by health care professionals and offered by the local YMCA. PURPOSE: The purpose of the current study was to determine if this program had differential effects on physical function and cognitive outcomes in those individuals that initially reported higher average levels of pain. METHODS: Individuals who reported an average pain score of 6 or greater out of 10 were allocated to the High Pain Group (n=22) and those whose average pain score was 5 or less to the Low Pain Group (n=12). Outcomes were determined prior to and following the program; these being Maximal Activity Score (MAS) and Adjusted Activity Score (AAS) from the Human Activity Profile, the Worst, Least and Average Pain scores (max=10) and Pain Interference Score from the Brief Pain Index, Depression score from the Patient Health Questionnaire, and Total, Rumination, Magnification, and Helplessness scores from the Pain Catastrophising Scale (PCS). RESULTS: The average pain scores in the High and Low Pain groups were 6.9±0.9 and 4.0±0.7 respectively. At the beginning of the program, the Worst, Least and Average Pain and Pain Interference scores were greater in the High Pain group (p<0.05) and decreased significantly after completion of the program; no changes occurred in the Low Pain Group. No differences were observed in MAS and AAS between the groups before or after the program. Depression and PCS scores were greater in the High Pain group prior to the program. A correlational analysis was used to examine relationships between the pre/post-program change scores for each outcome measure. In the Low Pain group, greater improvements in MAS and AAS were associated with greater reductions in pain interference and reductions in depression were associated with reductions in Total PCS. In the High Pain group, reductions in pain interference scores and depression were significantly associated with each other and with greater falls in all pain catastrophising variables. DISCUSSION: It would appear that individuals with high average pain scores tend to experience improvements in the cognitive affect domain relative to their pain perception, but those with lesser levels of pain seem to experience improvements in physical function.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation→French-language works237,207→