Cognitive-behavioral therapy for patients with chronic pain
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic pain is defined as persistent or recurrent pain lasting longer than 3 months; the severity of pain can be rated in terms of intensity, pain-related distress, and functional impairment. Researches have shown an association between psychosocial factors, such as empathic ability, and the severity of pain. Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) is the most common psychologic intervention for individuals with chronic pain. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of CBT on empathy in chronic pain patients, examining especially gender differences. In total, 89 patients with severe chronic pain (46 men and 43 women) underwent 8 sessions of CBT over the course of 4 weeks. Self-reported clinical symptoms were measured at the beginning and end of the CBT. Empathy was measured using the interpersonal reactivity index, and pain severity was assessed using the short-form McGill pain questionnaire. A comparison of male and female patients before CBT indicated that females showed higher levels of empathy in response to affective issues and reported greater affective pain than males. A mixed analysis of variance revealed that female patients showed higher levels of empathy than did male patients, both before and after CBT. We also found significant relationships between affective pain and empathy for others' personal distress in all patients. These results suggest that the effectiveness of CBT may be affected by chronic pain patients' level of empathy. Although the evident result was not shown in this study, the present findings imply that female patients may formulate excellent therapeutic alliance in CBT intervention that can lead to a clinical benefit.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it