The Role of Health Anxiety among Patients with Chronic Pain in Determining Response to Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Considerable research suggests that health anxiety (HA) influences the response of patients with chronic pain to pain and treatment. The present investigation extends the current understanding of HA and explores whether it affects how patients respond to a common therapeutic intervention, namely instructions to reduce pain behaviour. Sixty-five patients with chronic pain completed measures of pain, anxiety and cognition following an active occupational therapy session in which they were specifically instructed either to inhibit or reduce pain behaviour, or to carry out the session as they normally would. Regression analyses revealed that those with higher levels of HA experienced greater anxiety, somatic sensations and catastrophic cognitions during therapy than those with lower levels of HA. The regression analyses also revealed a consistent trend for an interaction between HA and instructional set; when those with higher HA reduced their pain behaviour, they subsequently reported greater anxiety, and more somatic sensations and catastrophic thoughts than when they carried out the session as they normally would. In contrast, only those with lower HA had a tendency to benefit from reducing pain behaviour, reporting lower state anxiety and fewer somatic sensations during the session than those who did not reduce their pain behaviour. The results suggest that HA should be taken into consideration during treatment.
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 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 | 0.015 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".