MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159212326 · doi:10.1016/j.ejpain.2008.06.005

The fear‐avoidance model in whiplash injuries

2008· article· en· W2159212326 on OpenAlexaff
Rubén Nieto, Jordi Miró, Anna Huguet

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Pain · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsIzaak Walton Killam Health Centre
FundersDepartament d'Universitats, Recerca i Societat de la InformacióInstitut Català de la SalutGeneralitat de Catalunya
KeywordsPain catastrophizingPsychologyWhiplashDepression (economics)Clinical psychologyBiopsychosocial modelMediationRuminationPhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationChronic painPoison controlPsychiatryMedicineCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this work was to study whether fear of movement, and pain catastrophizing predict pain related-disability and depression in sub-acute whiplash patients. Moreover, we wanted to test if fear of movement is a mediator in the relation between catastrophizing and pain-related disability/depression as has been suggested by the fear-avoidance model [Vlaeyen JWS, Kole-Snijders AMJ, Boeren RGB, van Eek H. Fear of movement/(re)injury in chronic low back pain and its relation to behavioral performance. Pain 1995;62:363-72]. The convenience sample used was of 147 sub-acute whiplash patients (pain duration less than 3 months). Two stepwise regression analyses were performed using fear of movement and catastrophizing as the independent variables, and disability and depression as the dependent variables. After controlling for descriptive variables and pain characteristics, catastrophizing and fear of movement were found to be predictors of disability and depression. Pain intensity was a predictor of disability but not of depression. The mediation effect of fear of movement in the relationships between catastrophizing and disability, and between catastrophizing and depression was also supported. The results of this study are in accordance with the fear-avoidance model, and support a biopsychosocial perspective for whiplash disorders.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations93
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of PainSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207