MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W317410487 · doi:10.1155/2015/832875

Development and Validation of the French‐Canadian Chronic Pain Self‐Efficacy Scale

2015· article· en· W317410487 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Anaïs Lacasse, Patricia Bourgault, Yannick Tousignant‐Laflamme, Roxanne Courtemanche-Harel, Manon Choinière

Bibliographic record

VenuePain Research and Management · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Education
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchInstitut de Réadaptation en Déficience Physique de Québec
KeywordsChronic painScale (ratio)PsychologyPsychometricsMedicineClinical psychologyPhysical therapyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Perceived self-efficacy is a non-negligible outcome when measuring the impact of self-management interventions for chronic pain patients. However, no validated, chronic pain-specific self-efficacy scales exist for studies conducted with French-speaking populations. OBJECTIVES: To establish the validity of the use of the French-Canadian Chronic Pain Self-efficacy Scale (FC-CPSES) among chronic pain patients. METHODS: The Chronic Disease Self-Efficacy Scale is a validated 33-item self-administered questionnaire that measures perceived self-efficacy to perform self-management behaviours, manage chronic disease in general and achieve outcomes (a six-item version is also available). This scale was adapted to the context of chronic pain patients following cross-cultural adaptation guidelines. The FC-CPSES was administered to 109&nbsp;fibromyalgia and 34 chronic low back pain patients (n=143) who participated in an evidence-based self-management intervention (the PASSAGE program) offered in 10 health care centres across the province of Quebec. Cronbach's alpha coefficients (α) were calculated to determine the internal consistency of the 33- and six-item versions of the FC-CPSES. With regard to convergent construct validity, the association between the FC-CPSES baseline scores and related clinical outcomes was examined. With regard to the scale's sensitivity to change, pre- and postintervention FC-CPSES scores were compared. RESULTS: Internal consistency was high for both versions of the FC-CPSES (α=0.86 to α=0.96). Higher self-efficacy was significantly associated with higher mental health-related quality of life and lower pain intensity and catastrophizing (P<0.05), supporting convergent validity of the scale. There was a statistically significant increase in FC-CPSES scores between pre- and postintervention measures for both versions of the FC-CPSES (P<0.003), which supports their sensitivity to clinical change during an intervention. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that both versions of the FC-CPSES are reliable and valid for the measurement of pain management self-efficacy among chronic pain patients.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.758
Threshold uncertainty score0.223

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.263 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations33
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePain Research and ManagementSame topicDiabetes Management and EducationFrench-language works237,207