Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: What is the role of psychological factors in chronic pain and chronic pain disability? METHODOLOGY: The literature search identified 20 observational studies to provide evidence about this question. RESULTS: Most studies evaluated psychological variables as predictors of return to work. Most studies were prospective cohort studies, including those providing the most data about etiology. In some studies, weak methods and analyses limited the conclusions. In addition, the methodologic criteria of the literature search excluded some well-known reports about this subject. CONCLUSIONS: Because of the small number of studies, there was inadequate evidence that chronic pain results from a prior psychiatric disorder (level 4a). The studies provided limited evidence (level 3) that chronic depression plays a role in the development of new pain locations (although not for low back pain); that prior nervousness and past negative life events predict work disability; and that depression, anxiety, and a sense that control rests outside of one's own self may predict slower recovery from pain and disability. These findings do not prove that psychological factors have a role in the development of chronic pain. Psychological impairment may precede the onset of pain. Based on current knowledge, it may also arise as a complication of chronic pain.
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 | 0.033 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".