Fear of Pain and Fear of Falling among Younger and Older Adults with Musculoskeletal Pain Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The fear-avoidance model of pain accounts for the debilitating consequences of strong fear as a component of reactions to painful conditions (eg, movements become anxiety-provoking because they cause pain). The model, which is supported in the literature, posits that fear of pain interferes with recovery because it leads to avoidance of beneficial activity. Despite the high prevalence of pain among the elderly, investigations of fear of pain in this population are scarce. A related construct, fear of falling, has been studied among elderly (but not younger) adults as an age-specific concern. OBJECTIVES: To examine the relationship between fear of pain and fear of falling. Specifically, it is hypothesized that fear of pain and fear of falling are distinct constructs. Moreover, the authors investigated whether fear of falling becomes more relevant with increasing age in a sample of seniors and younger adults with musculoskeletal conditions. METHODS: A convenience sample of younger and older adult physiotherapy outpatients (n=226) receiving treatment for musculoskeletal conditions were recruited for the study. Fear of pain and fear of falling were assessed using self-report measures. RESULTS: There were no age differences with respect to fear of pain and fear of falling. Regression analyses showed that fear of pain measures contribute substantial unique variance to the prediction of each other; however, they only make minor unique contributions to the prediction of fear of falling. Similar results were obtained through confirmatory analyses using structural modelling techniques. CONCLUSIONS: The analyses supported the distinctiveness of fear of pain and fear of falling. Moreover, among physiotherapy outpatients with musculoskeletal pain conditions, fear of falling and fear of pain are distinct constructs that appear to represent the concerns of both seniors and younger pain patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".