MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2573067580 · doi:10.1027/0269-8803/a000184

Trauma, Pain, and Psychological Distress

2017· article· en· W2573067580 on OpenAlexaff
R. Nicholas Carleton, Sophie Duranceau, Katherine A. McMillan, Gordon J. G. Asmundson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychophysiology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyAnxietyChronic painDistressClinical psychologyStartle responseCognitionPsychiatryAudiologyMedicineNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) are highly prevalent ( Breslau, 2002 ) and comorbid disorders ( Otis, Keane, & Kerns, 2003 ). The shared vulnerability model explains this overlap in part through a common attentional bias toward threat ( Asmundson, Coons, Taylor, & Katz, 2002 ). The current study made use of the acoustic startle to assess cognitive bias to threat in participants (n = 106; 64% women) who reported experiencing a motor vehicle accident (MVA). Participants were divided into five groups based on their diagnoses: PTSD, CMP, both PTSD and CMP, any general (i.e., non-PTSD) anxiety disorder with no CMP, and a no-disorder Control group. Self-report measures were used to assess psychological symptoms, trauma response, and pain-related factors. Word stimuli (i.e., trauma, sensory pain, health, pleasant, neutral) were presented visually prior to onset of the acoustic startle probe to assess for diagnosis-congruent attentional biases (e.g., persons with PTSD respond differently to trauma words). Relative to the general anxiety and control group, persons with PTSD or chronic pain demonstrated delayed startle peak and greater startle intensity across all word stimuli types; the results suggest there may be psychophysiologically measurable differences associated with PTSD and pain. The startle probe paradigm remains relatively nascent for such research, but has potential utility for assessment and treatment monitoring. Comprehensive results, discussion, and implications are analyzed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score0.194

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of PsychophysiologySame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207