Knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes of the Quebec population toward chronic pain: Where are we now?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Many chronic pain (CP) awareness and educational initiatives have been achieved, but it is time to take stock of where we are today.Aims: The aim of this study was to describe and identify determinants of knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes of different subgroups of the Quebec population regarding CP and especially toward people suffering from this condition.Methods: A web-based, cross-sectional study was conducted between May and June 2014.Results: A total of 1958 participants responded, among whom 70.9% reported suffering from CP and 14.4% reported being a health care professional (HCP). Almost half of the participants were not aware that the risk of developing CP is increased after undergoing surgery or that CP affects approximately one in five adults. A minority (10.30%) agreed that HCP are well trained in CP treatment. The two most frequent negative beliefs were that people suffering from CP become dependent on their medications as do drug addicts (16.7%) and that consulting a psychologist is useless unless the person with CP is depressed (16.9%). Multiple regression analysis showed that being a woman, being born in Canada, being unemployed, suffering from CP, and being an HCP were predictors of better knowledge and more positive attitudes toward people suffering from CP (all P values < 0.05). Older age and residing in a remote region were associated with poorer knowledge and more negative attitudes.Conclusions: Our results underline the importance of continuing the efforts and the need for more education programs, awareness campaigns, and stigma reduction activities about CP for HCP, patients, and the general public.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".