MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3128121817 · doi:10.1177/2515690x21991995

Is There an Association Between Social Support and Pain Among Individuals Living With Multiple Sclerosis?

2021· article· en· W3128121817 on OpenAlexaffabout
Khrisha B. Alphonsus, Carl D’Arcy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Evidence-Based Integrative Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsRoyal University HospitalUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial supportAssociation (psychology)Context (archaeology)Logistic regressionPsychologyOddsMedicineClinical psychologyActivities of daily livingOdds ratioPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: Pain is one of the most common symptoms reported by patients living with Multiple Sclerosis (MS). Risk factors associated with pain may include individual's cognitive thinking process, emotional and behavioural response to pain and amount of social support. There is a lack of research on the influence on the amount of social support and its association to pain outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to determine the association between amount and of social support and its association with odds of pain among individuals with MS. METHODS: The Survey on Living with Neurological Conditions in Canada (SLNCC) 2011-2012 linked to the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) 2010-2011 was used to carry out a logistic regression model for this analysis (N = 78,623). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The factors that were assessed were psychological factors, problems with sleeping, self-perceived general health, self-perceived level of stress, number of years living with MS, as well as social factors. The outcome variable was pain. RESULTS: The amount of social support was found to be significant in that individuals who had 3 or fewer types of social support were 3.02 times more likely (95% CI 1.06 to 8.59) to report being in pain as opposed to individuals who had 4 types of support. The results indicate the importance of self efficacy in overcoming symptoms of MS and the need for more home care services.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.976

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.213
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.166 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Evidence-Based Integrative MedicineSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207