A Psychosocial Risk Factor–Targeted Intervention for the Prevention of Chronic Pain and Disability Following Whiplash Injury
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to determine whether the addition of a psychosocial intervention improved return-to-work rates beyond those associated with participation in a functional restoration physical therapy intervention. Subjects who had sustained whiplash injuries participated in the Progressive Goal Attainment Program (PGAP), which is a 10-week psychosocial intervention program that aims to increase activity involvement and minimize psychological barriers to rehabilitation progress. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A sample of 60 subjects enrolled in a functional restoration physical therapy intervention were used as a historical cohort comparison group. Subjects who received the functional restoration physical therapy intervention were compared with a sample of 70 subjects who received PGAP in addition to physical therapy. RESULTS: Participation in PGAP plus physical therapy resulted in a higher return-to-work rate (75%) than participation in physical therapy alone (50%). Differences between treatment conditions were most pronounced for the subgroup of subjects who had the largest number of psychosocial risk factors. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that a psychosocial risk reduction intervention can be an effective means of improving function and facilitating return to work in people who are at risk for prolonged pain-related disability.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 it