Link Between Positive Clinician‐Conveyed Expectations of Treatment Effect and Pain Reduction in Knee Osteoarthritis, Mediated by Patient Self‐Efficacy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: A prior knee osteoarthritis (OA) trial found that provider-conveyed expectations for treatment success were associated with pain improvement. We hypothesized this relationship was mediated by patient self-efficacy, since expectations of improvement may enhance one's ability to control health behaviors, and therefore health. Our aim was to examine whether self-efficacy was a mediator of the relationship observed in this trial. METHODS: A secondary analysis of a 3-arm (traditional acupuncture, sham acupuncture, and wait list) trial for knee OA was conducted. Those in the acupuncture groups were equally randomized to acupuncturists trained to communicate a high or neutral expectation of treatment success (e.g., using language conveying high or unclear likelihood that acupuncture would reduce knee pain). A modified Arthritis Self-Efficacy Questionnaire and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain subscale were administered. Linear regression analyses were used to examine whether patient self-efficacy mediated the relationship between provider communication style and knee pain at 3 months. RESULTS: High-expectation provider communication was associated with patient self-efficacy, β coefficient of 0.14 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.01, 0.28). Self-efficacy was associated with WOMAC pain, β coefficient of -9.29 (95% CI -11.11, -7.47), while controlling for the provider communication style. The indirect effect a × b of -1.36 for high versus neutral expectation (bootstrap 95% CI -2.80, -0.15; does not include 0), supports the conclusion that patient self-efficacy mediates the relationship between provider-communicated expectations of treatment effects and knee pain. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that clinician-conveyed expectations can enhance the benefit of treatments targeting knee OA symptoms, mediated by improved patient self-efficacy.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".