Changes in readiness to self-manage pain are associated with improvement in multidisciplinary pain treatment and pain coping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A patient's readiness to adopt a self-management approach to pain has been hypothesized to increase during multidisciplinary pain treatment and to impact pain coping responses. The Pain Stages of Change Questionnaire (PSOCQ; [J Pain (1997) 227]) was designed to assess four components of readiness to self-manage pain: pre-contemplation, contemplation, action, and maintenance. We tested three hypotheses concerning this construct in two different samples of patients with chronic pain: (1) readiness to self-manage pain, as assessed by the PSOCQ, would increase from pre-multidisciplinary pain treatment to post-treatment and follow-up; (2) changes in readiness to self-manage pain measured pre-treatment to post-treatment and follow-up would be associated with changes in the use of pain coping strategies; and (3) increases in readiness to self-manage pain would be associated with improvement in multidisciplinary pain treatment. The findings supported all three hypotheses. We discuss the implications of the findings for understanding motivational issues in the self-management of pain.
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 | 0.017 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".