Changes in Perceived Pain Severity during Interdisciplinary Treatment for Chronic Pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is good support for the effectiveness of interdisciplinary chronic pain management programs in improving functional outcomes; however, relatively little is known about patients who report deterioration following participation in such programs. OBJECTIVES: The present retrospective study investigated patients' reports of increased pain severity during participation in a cognitive-behaviourally oriented, outpatient treatment for chronic pain. METHODS: Participants (n=280) completed a four-week, group-based, interdisciplinary chronic pain self-management program at a rehabilitation hospital. They completed pre- and post-treatment questionnaires, which included global change ratings of pain severity and clinically-relevant measures, including pain intensity ratings, functional limitations, pain catastrophizing and self-efficacy. RESULTS: Statistically significant pre-post improvements were observed for all study variables. Almost all patients reported global improvement overall. Nevertheless, a subset of patients (n=99) reported increased pain severity on global ratings. These individuals were characterized by lower self-efficacy at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Participants endorsed significant pre- and post-treatment improvements in all domains. Nevertheless, some participants reported deterioration. The findings shed light on variables associated with negative treatment outcomes and have practical applications for interdisciplinary chronic pain management programs.
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 | 0.010 | 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".