Validation of the General Health Questionnaire 12 for assessing psychological distress in patients with chronic low back pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The General Health Questionnaire 12 (GHQ-12) is a short easy-to-use scale to assess psychological distress. The GHQ-12 has not been validated for assessing psychological distress in patients with chronic low back pain (LBP). OBJECTIVE: To investigate the psychometric properties of the GHQ-12 in patients with chronic LBP. METHODS: The study involved a population of patients undergoing functional restoration for chronic LBP. The intraclass coefficient correlation was used for test-retest reliability (good if > 0.7) and the standard error measurement for absolute reliability. Construct validity was assessed with the Spearman correlation coefficient (moderate and high if r⩾ 0.35 and 0.5, respectively) and internal consistency with Cronbach's alpha (suitable if > 0.7). Responsiveness was assessed by the Wilcoxon test and effect size. RESULTS: Four hundred and five patients were included. The intraclass coefficient correlation was 0.73 and standard error measurement 2.49. The GHQ-12 showed high convergence with the Beck Depression Inventory and subscales of the Dallas Pain Questionnaire for anxiety and depression and for sociability. It showed moderate convergence with the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale and subscales of the Dallas Pain Questionnaire for daily activities and for leisure and occupation. Cronbach's alpha was 0.89. The GHQ-12 score changed after functional restoration. It was lower (better) with than without improvement. CONCLUSIONS: We provide validation of the GHQ-12 for assessing psychological distress in patients with chronic LBP.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".