MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125325150 · doi:10.1093/gerona/glq039

The Association Between Noncancer Pain, Cognitive Impairment, and Functional Disability: An Analysis of the Canadian Study of Health and Aging

2010· article· en· W2125325150 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Joseph W. Shega, D. Weiner, Judith A. Paice, S. Pinar Bilir, K. Rockwood, Keela Herr, Mary Ersek, Linda L. Emanuel, William Dale

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journals of Gerontology Series A · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Management and Opioid Use
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Institute on AgingNational Palliative Care Research CenterCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDalhousie UniversityNational Institutes of HealthDalhousie Medical Research Foundation
KeywordsCognitive impairmentAssociation (psychology)CognitionGerontologyMedicineFunctional impairmentPsychologyClinical psychologyPsychiatryPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Noncancer pain and cognitive impairment affect many older adults and each is associated with functional disability, but their combined impact has yet to be rigorously studied. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional analysis of the Canadian Study of Health and Aging. Pain was collapsed from a 5-point to a dichotomous scale (no and very mild vs moderate and greater). Cognitive status was dichotomized from the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination (0-100) to no (>77) or mild-moderate (77-50) impairment. Five Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) and seven Activities of Daily Living (ADL) were self-rated as "accomplished without any help" (0), "with some help" (1), or "completely unable to do oneself" (2) and then summed to create a composite score of 0-10 and 0-14, respectively. Multivariate linear regression analysis was conducted to determine the associations between self-reported functional status with moderate or greater pain, cognitive impairment, and the interaction of the two. RESULTS: A total of 5,143 (90.2%) participants were eligible, 1,813 (35.6%) reported pain at a moderate intensity or greater and 727 (14.3%) were cognitively impaired. The median IADL and ADL summary scores increased among the pain and cognition categories in the following order: no pain and cognitively intact (0.63 SD 1.24, 0.23 SD 0.80), pain and cognitively intact (1.18 SD 1.69, 0.57 SD 1.27), no pain and cognitively impaired (1.64 SD 2.22, 0.75 SD 1.57), and pain and cognitively impaired (2.27 SD 2.47, 1.35 SD 2.09), respectively. Multivariate linear regression found IADL summary scores were associated with pain, coefficient .17 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.07-0.26), p < .01; cognitive impairment, coefficient .67 (95% CI 0.51-0.83), p < .01; and an interaction effect of pain with cognitive impairment, coefficient .24 (95% CI 0.01-0.49), p = .05. ADL summary scores were associated with pain coefficient .10 (95% CI 0.04-0.17), p < .01 and cognitive impairment, coefficient .29 (95% CI 0.19-0.39), p < .01, but had a nonsignificant interaction term, coefficient .12 (95% CI -0.03 to 0.29), p = .12. CONCLUSIONS: Noncancer pain and cognitive impairment are independently associated with IADL and ADL impairment and IADL impairment is even greater when both conditions are present.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.007
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations52
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journals of Gerontology Series ASame topicPain Management and Opioid UseFrench-language works237,207