Психоэмоциональные расстройства у пациентов с хроническими болевыми синдромами пояснично-крестцовой локализации
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the study — to examine the peculiarities of psychoemotional disorders in groups of patients with chronic low back pain according to The Quebec Task Force Classification for Spinal Disorders (QTFCSD). Materials and methods. 103 patients with chronic vertebrogenic low back pain (CVLBP) and 30 apparently healthy subjects were examined. According to the results of clinical and neurological examination, all patients were divided into groups that met the first four groups of QTFCSD. In order to study psychoemotional disorders, a survey was conducted using Spielberger test modified by Khanin and Beck inventory. Results. In the group of patients with CVLBP, we observed higher levels of reactive and personal anxiety, depression compared to the control group. Thus, the average score of reactive anxiety was 51 (47; 58), personal anxiety — 44 (41; 50), depression — 4 (3; 7) points. When dividing the patients into groups according to QTFCSD, the highest values of reactive (56 (49.5; 61.5)) and personal (47 (41.5; 51.5)) anxiety, as well as depression (6 (4; 9)) were in group IV. Levels of personal anxiety and depression significantly (P anxiety and depression of varying degree, for detection of which it’s appropriate to carry out a comprehensive clinical and psychological examination. The study of anxiety and depression indicators allows us to individualize the approach to the treatment that will improve the psychoemotional and social status of patients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".