MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119480351

Cognitive treatment of illness perceptions. A theory-driven approach to chronic low back pain rehabilitation

2012· dissertation· en· W2119480351 on OpenAlex
Petra Siemonsma

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTNO Repository · 2012
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersZonMw
KeywordsRehabilitationChronic painPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPerceptionLow back painCognitionPhysical therapyMedicinePsychotherapistPsychologyPsychiatryAlternative medicineNeuroscience
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

General discussion and epilogue this challenge using as our case study Cognitive Treatment of Illness Perceptions (CTIP), a rehabilitation treatment for patients suffering from chronic low back pain (CLBP).In this chapter we reflect on the difficulties that we encountered in making use of theory-driven methods in rehabilitation.Three dilemmas were faced: (1) how to give primacy to theory without weakening the methodological quality of the study, (2) whether to give primacy to proving or improving CTIP, and (3) whether to give primacy to research needs or to clinical practice needs.Subsequently, the results are discussed of (1) the prospects of transferring the research results to other environments and situations, (2) the prospects for the structural implementation of the treatment in rehabilitation practice and (3) the aspects that are worth further research.Finally, I reflect on the overall gain in knowledge that results from this thesis in the epilogue. Dilemmas in making use of theory-driven research in rehabilitationThe first dilemma in making use of theory-driven research in rehabilitation was how to give primacy to theory without weakening the methodological quality of the study.Usually, researchers give primacy to methodological issues.In such methodology-driven research the randomized controlled trial is advocated as the optimal design for examining treatment effectiveness, because it comes with a clear set of requirements to counter threats to internal validity.Within this perspective theory comes into play at the end of the research process to understand and interpret the results, also called post-hoc theorizing.Theorydriven research explicitly integrates theory in the research design from the very start of the study.In the CTIP study, for example, Leventhal's Common sense Self-Regulation Model (CSRM) leads to a strong focus on the individual's illness perceptions in explaining the limitations in physical activity.CTIP, therefore, aimed at increasing patient-relevant activities.These activities were hypothesized to be best measured with PSFL, rather than a more generic measure such as Quebec.However, such measures that specifically matches with the treatment outcomes are generally more time-consuming to administer, are not as well researched on methodological issues (such as reliability and validity) and are, therefore, not as well accepted in the international research community.As a result, these measures, such as PSFL, that most accurately assess the specific outcome of a particular treatment are also more difficult to compare between studies.In this thesis we have balanced theory and methodology by including

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.891
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.271 · 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