MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2531147270 · doi:10.1016/j.sjpain.2016.08.008

Chronic neck pain patients with traumatic or non-traumatic onset: Differences in characteristics. A cross-sectional study

2016· article· en· W2531147270 on OpenAlexaff
Inge Ris, Birgit Juul‐Kristensen, Eleanor Boyle, Alice Kongsted, Claus Manniche, Karen Søgaard

Bibliographic record

VenueScandinavian Journal of Pain · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
FundersSouthwest Hospital
KeywordsMedicineCross-sectional studyNeck painChronic painPhysical therapyAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Patients with chronic neck pain can present with disability, low quality of life, psychological factors and clinical symptoms. It is unclear whether patients with a traumatic onset differ from those with a non-traumatic onset, by having more complex and severe symptoms. The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical presentation of chronic neck pain patients with and without traumatic onset by examining cervical mobility, sensorimotor function, cervical muscle performance and pressure pain threshold in addition to the following self-reported characteristics: quality of life, neck pain and function, kinesiophobia, depression, and pain bothersomeness. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 200 participants with chronic neck pain: 120 with traumatic onset and 80 with non-traumatic onset. Participants were recruited from physiotherapy clinics in primary and secondary health care. For participants to be included, they were required to be at least 18 years of age, have had neck pain for at least 6 months, and experienced neck-related activity limitation as determined by a score of at least 10 on the Neck Disability Index. We conducted the following clinical tests of cervical range of motion, gaze stability, eye movement, cranio-cervical flexion, cervical extensors, and pressure pain threshold. The participants completed the following questionnaires: physical and mental component summary of the Short Form Health Survey, EuroQol-5D, Neck Disability Index, Patient-Specific Functional Scale, Pain Bothersomeness, Beck Depression Inventory-II, and TAMPA scale of kinesiophobia. The level of significance for all analyses was defined as p<0.01. Differences between groups for the continuous data were determined using either a Student's t-test or Mann Whitney U test. RESULTS: In both groups, the majority of the participants were female (approximately 75%). Age, educational level, working situation and sleeping patterns were similar in both groups. The traumatic group had symptoms for a shorter duration (88 vs. 138 months p=0.001). Participants in the traumatic group showed worse results on all measures compared with those in the non-traumatic group, significantly on neck muscle function (cervical extension mobility p=0.005, cranio-cervical flexion test p=0.007, cervical extensor test p=0.006) and cervical pressure pain threshold bilateral (p=0.002/0.004), as well on self-reported function (Neck Disability Index p=0.001 and Patient-Specific Functional Scale p=0.007), mental quality of life (mental component summary of the Short Form Health Survey p=0.004 and EuroQol-5D p=0.001) and depression (Beck Depression Inventory-II p=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed significant differences between chronic neck pain patients when differentiated into groups based on their onset of pain. However, no specific clinical test or self-reported characteristic could differentiate between the groups at an individual patient level. IMPLICATIONS: Pressure pain threshold tests, cervical muscle performance tests and patient-reported characteristics about self-perceived function and psychological factors may assist in profiling chronic neck pain patients. The need for more intensive management of those with a traumatic onset compared with those with a non-traumatic onset should be examined further.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations51
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScandinavian Journal of PainSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207