Effects of Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy on Pain Intensity and Stress Coping Styles in Patients With Gastric Wound
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Aim: Patients with the symptoms of gastrointestinal diseases and ulcers constitute a large number of patients referring to general and internal clinics. Furthermore, preliminary studies on gastric ulcers highlighted the role of psychological factors in the development of a susceptible gastric ulcer. The current study aimed to determine the effects of Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (CBT) on pain intensity and stress coping styles in patients with gastric ulcers. Methods & Materials: This was an experimental study with a pretest-posttest-follow-up and a control group design. The statistical population included all patients with a gastric ulcer who were referred to public health centers in Tehran City, Iran, in the winter of 2018. Among the volunteers participating in the study, 30 patients with gastric ulcers were selected by the convenience sampling method. Next, they were randomly assigned to the experimental and control groups (n=15/group). Measurement tools included the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ) and the Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations (CISS; Endler & Parker, 1990). The experimental group subjects participated in eight 90-minute sessions of CBT. However, the controls received no psychological treatment in this period. For data analysis, repeated-measures Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and post-hoc tests were applied. Ethical Considerations: This study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Islamic Azad University, Karaj Branch (Code: IR.IAU.K.REC.1397.85). Results: The present research results signified that CBT improved problem-oriented coping styles (P<0.01) and decreased emotion-focused coping styles (P<0.01) and avoidance (P<0.01) in the test group. Besides, the mean scores of pain intensity decreased in the experimental group, compared to the controls (P<0.01). Conclusion: The provided CBT was effective on pain intensity and stress coping styles in patients with gastric ulcers.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".