Cognitive Treatment of Illness Perceptions in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Illness perceptions have been shown to predict patient activities. Therefore, studies of the effectiveness of a targeted illness-perception intervention on chronic nonspecific low back pain (CLBP) are needed. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of treatment of illness perceptions against a waiting list for patients with CLBP. DESIGN: This was a prospectively registered randomized controlled trial with an assessor blinded for group allocation. SETTING: The study was conducted in an outpatient rehabilitation clinic. PARTICIPANTS: The participants were 156 patients (18-70 years of age) with CLBP (>3 months). INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned to either a treatment group or to a waiting list (control) group. Trained physical therapists and occupational therapists delivered 10 to 14 one-hour treatment sessions according to the treatment protocol. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome measure was change in patient-relevant physical activities (patient-specific complaints questionnaire). The secondary outcome measures were changes in illness perceptions (illness perceptions questionnaire) and generic physical activity level (quebec back pain disability scale). Measurements were taken at baseline (0 weeks) and after treatment (18 weeks). RESULTS: A baseline-adjusted analysis of covariance showed that there were statistically significant differences between intervention and control groups at 18 weeks for the change in patient-relevant physical activities. This was a clinically relevant change (19.1 mm) for the intervention group. Statistically significant differences were found for the majority of illness perception scales. There were no significant differences in generic physical activity levels. LIMITATIONS: Longer-term effectiveness was not studied. CONCLUSIONS: This first trial evaluating cognitive treatment of illness perceptions concerning CLBP showed statistically significant and clinically relevant improvements in patient-relevant physical activities at 18 weeks.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".