MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116881601 · doi:10.1177/070674370204701004

PTSD and the Experience of Pain: Research and Clinical Implications of Shared Vulnerability and Mutual Maintenance Models

2002· review· en· W2116881601 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalYork UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChronic painVulnerability (computing)PsychologyClinical psychologyPsychiatryPosttraumatic stress

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is common for individuals with symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) to present with co-occurring pain problems, and vice versa. However, the relation between these conditions often goes unrecognized in clinical settings. In this paper, we describe potential relations between PTSD and chronic pain and their implications for assessment and treatment. To accomplish this, we discuss phenomenological similarities of these conditions, the prevalence of chronic pain in patients with PTSD, and the prevalence of PTSD in patients with chronic pain. We also present several possible explanations for the co-occurrence of these disorders, based primarily on the notions of shared vulnerability and mutual maintenance. The paper concludes with an overview of future research directions, as well as practical recommendations for assessing and treating patients who present with co-occurring PTSD or chronic pain symptoms.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.728
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.377
GPT teacher head0.505
Teacher spread0.129 · 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