Are you better? A multi‐centre study of patient‐defined recovery from Complex Regional Pain Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS) symptoms can significantly differ between patients, fluctuate over time, disappear or persist. This leads to problems in defining recovery and in evaluating the efficacy of therapeutic interventions. OBJECTIVES: To define recovery from the patients' perspective and better understand their priorities for treatment approaches. METHODS: Establishing an international consortium, we used a 2-Round Delphi-based study in eight countries across Europe and North America. Participants ≥18 years who met, or had met, Budapest clinical criteria were included. Round 1 participants completed the statement: 'I would/do consider myself recovered from CRPS if/because…' alongside demographic and health questionnaires. Data were thematically organised and represented as 62 statements, from which participants identified and ranked their recovery priorities in Round 2. RESULTS: Round 1 (N = 347, 80% female, 91% non-recovered) dominant ICF themes were: activities of daily living; bodily functions; external factors; participation and personal factors. The top five priority statements in Round 2 (N = 252) were: no longer having (1) CRPS-related pain, (2) generalised pain and discomfort, (3) restricted range of movement, (4) need for medication, (5) stiffness in the affected limb. With very few exceptions, priorities were consistent, irrespective of patient demographics/geography. Symptoms affecting daily activities were among those most frequently reported. CONCLUSIONS: Our data showed a small number of themes are of highest importance to CRPS patients' definition of recovery. Patients want their pain, movement restriction and reliance on medication to be addressed, above all other factors. These factors should therefore be foremost concerns for future treatment and rehabilitation programmes. SIGNIFICANCE: Those with longstanding CRPS may no longer meet diagnostic criteria but still be symptomatic. Defining recovery is therefore problematic in CRPS. Our study has identified patients' definition of recovery from CRPS, in order of priority, as relief from: their CRPS-related pain, generalised pain, movement restriction, reliance on medication, and stiffness.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".