Analysis of Psychological CharacteristicsImpacting Spinal Cord Stimulation TreatmentOutcomes: A Prospective Assessment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Psychological factors are recognised as influencing the outcome of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) although there is currently no consensus as to which factors impact upon SCS efficacy. Objective: To identify psychological characteristics that may impact the efficacy of SCS. Study Design: Prospective evaluation. Setting: Single secondary care center in Dudley, United Kingdom. Methods: Patients: Seventy-five patients were initially recruited and 56 patients (31 women and 25 men) were followed-up for 12-months. Intervention: SCS for the management of chronic non-cancer pain. Main Outcome Measures: Outcome measures assessed at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months following SCS implantation included the visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), hospital anxiety and depression (HAD) scale, and the pain coping strategies questionnaire (PCSQ). Results: Statistically significant improvements were observed for the VAS (P < 0.001), ODI (P = 0.011), anxiety (P = 0.042), and depression (P = 0.010) in the HAD scale and for the subscales reinterpreting pain sensation (P = 0.018), control over pain (P = 0.001), and ability to decrease pain (P < 0.001) of the PCSQ. We observed that depression and autonomous coping (control over pain, ability to reduce pain, and catastrophizing) may impact sensory aspects such as pain intensity and disability scores affecting the outcome of SCS treatment. Age at time of implant and duration of pain prior to implant were also found to impact SCS efficacy. Limitations: It has been reported that loss of analgesia may be experienced within 12 to 24 months following SCS implantation and therefore, it would be of interest to follow patients over a longer period. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that psychological aspects such as depression and autonomous coping may impact SCS treatment. Addressing these issues prior to SCS implantation may improve SCS long-term outcome. Key words: Spinal cord stimulation, chronic pain, psychological characteristics, depression, autonomous coping
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".