Pain-related and performance anxiety and their contribution to pain in music students: a pilot study
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
<b>Background</b><br /> Pain complaints are common among musicians, whose occupation is highly demanding on both a physical and a psychological level. The purpose of the present study was to better understand the severity of musculoskeletal pain in orchestra musicians by measuring the potential contributions of biological (medical diagnosis), psychosocial (age, gender, instrument, practice and exercising history, and occupational satisfaction), and psychological (pain-related anxiety, performance anxiety, and affect) variables.<br /> <br /> <b>Participants and procedure</b><br /> Data were collected from 59 music students playing in a symphonic orchestra. Univariate analyses were performed to assess differences in biological, psychosocial, and psychological predictors, using the presence or absence of pain as the dependent variable. Regression analyses were performed to develop a model of variance to explain the severity of pain.<br /> <br /> <b>Results</b><br /> The results revealed lower occupational satisfaction to be associated with the presence of pain. However, a greater proportion of variance (31%) in pain severity was explained by pain-related anxiety combined with performance anxiety. Thus, the model that would best explain playing-related pain in musicians would need to focus mainly on psychological variables, namely pain-related and performance anxiety.<br /> <br /> <b>Conclusions</b><br /> Further investigation is needed to determine how treatment of musculoskeletal pain in musicians should address these psychological variables.
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 | 0.014 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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