Torture survivors’ symptom load compared to chronic pain and psychiatric in-patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Before their entry into the rehabilitation program at the Rehabilitation and Research Centre for Torture Victims ('RCT') in Copenhagen, the degree of symptoms of a group of resettled traumatized refugees was assessed by means of two rating scales: the Disability Rating Index (DRI) (n=197), measuring pain-related functional disability, and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) (n=147). The results obtained were compared with other patient populations, which included (1) a large Swedish mixed pain group and (2) various groups of pain patients previously investigated in the validation study of the DRI scale. The DRI scores of the refugee group were comparable to, or higher than, those of the pain groups, except for patients suffering from multiple sclerosis. The degree of anxiety and depression was found to be considerably greater in the refugee group than in the pain groups. Another recently published Danish study comparing traumatized refugees with psychiatric in-patients in terms of Health of Nation Outcome Scores (HoNOS) documented a higher degree of psychiatric disability for refugees. Based on the hypothesis that the observed differences in this study were underestimated due to the exclusion of refugees with psychotic symptoms and substance abuse, a partial re-analysis of the data was carried out by calculating effect sizes with and without the items measuring these symptoms. Controlling for the exclusion of the critical items resulted in a more pronounced difference between the refugees and psychiatric inpatients. Based on the data compared in this study, traumatized refugees are shown to suffer from multiple problems, including chronic pain, at a high symptom-level. This challenges prior clinical assumptions that single factors like PTSD can explain all symptoms.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".