The Influence of Physical and Psychosocial Factors on Disruptive Pain Among Seriously Ill Home Care Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To estimate the prevalence and correlates of disruptive pain in a sample of seriously ill home care patients in the Canadian province of Ontario. METHODS: The design was a cross-sectional analysis of secondary data from 2757 patients aged 65+. RESULTS: Overall, 69.0% (n = 1902) had any level of pain and 41.6% (n = 1146) indicated that their pain disrupted their usual activities. In the univariate analysis of demographics, the risk of disruptive pain decreased significantly with increasing age ( P < .0001) and was significantly less common among men ( P = .0015). Multivariate analysis showed that unsteady gait (relative risk [RR] = 1.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.18-1.59), arthritis (RR = 1.35; 95% CI, 1.23-1.49), symptoms of depression (RR = 1.24; 95% CI, 1.13-1.37), and declines in social activity that the patient rated as distressing (RR = 1.19; 95% CI, 1.08-1.31) were independently associated with disruptive pain. CONCLUSION: Disruptive pain is highly prevalent in this group, and the key factors associated with this outcome represent physical as well as psychosocial domain areas.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".