Multidimensional features of pain in patients with chronic neck pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction: Chronic neck pain is associated with significant health costs and loss of productivity at work. Objective: to assess pain and disability in individuals with chronic neck pain. Methods: 31 volunteers with chronic neck pain, mean age 29, 65 years, were assessed using the McGill Pain Questionnaire in Brazilian version (Br-MPQ) and Neck Disability Index (NDI). The Br-MPQ analysis was performed based on the numerical values associated with the words selected to describe the experience of pain (Pain Rating Index - PRI), and present pain intensity (PPI). NDI was used to evaluate the influence of neck pain in performance of everyday tasks. Finally, we investigated the association between PPI and NDI. Results: PRI revealed that the most significant dimension was the sensory pain (70%), and the number of chosen words was 10 (2,62) out of 20 words. Mean PPI value was 1,23 (0,76) in five points; 40% of participants described pain intensity as moderate. NDI score was 9,77 (3,34), indicating mild disability. There was a positive association between disability and pain intensity (r = 0,36; p =0,046). Pain intensity and duration of pain were not associated. Conclusions: Findings of this study identified important information related to neck pain experienced by patients when suffering from chronic neck pain, moreover, the association between disability and pain intensity reinforces the importance of complementary investigation of these aspects to optimize function in them.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".