Fear of movement and (re)injury in chronic musculoskeletal pain: Evidence for an invariant two-factor model of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia across pain diagnoses and Dutch, Swedish, and Canadian samples
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
The aims of the current study were twofold. First, the factor structure, reliability (i.e., internal consistency), and validity (i.e., concurrent criterion validity) of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK), a measure of fear of movement and (re)injury, were investigated in a Dutch sample of patients with work-related upper extremity disorders (study 1). More specifically, examination of the factor structure involved a test of three competitive models: the one-factor model of all 17 TSK items, a one-factor model of the TSK (Woby SR, Roach NK, Urmston M, Watson P. Psychometric properties of the TSK-11: a shortened version of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia. Pain 2005;117:137-44.), and a two-factor model of the TSK-11. Second, invariance of the aforementioned TSK models was examined in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain conditions (i.e., work-related upper extremity disorders, chronic low back pain, fibromyalgia, osteoarthritis) from The Netherlands, Sweden, and Canada was assessed (study 2). Results from study 1 showed that the two-factor model of the TSK-11 consisting of 'somatic focus' (TSK-SF) and 'activity avoidance' (TSK-AA) had the best fit. The TSK factors showed reasonable internal consistency, and were modestly but significantly related to disability, supporting the concurrent criterion validity of the TSK scales. Results from study 2 showed that the two-factor model of the TSK-11 was invariant across pain diagnoses and Dutch, Swedish, and Canadian samples. Altogether, we consider the TSK-11 and its two subscales a psychometrically sound instrument of fear of movement and (re)injury and recommend to use this measure in future research as well as in clinical settings.
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 | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| 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