MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220782147 · doi:10.1097/pr9.0000000000000991

The chronic disease helplessness survey: developing and validating a better measure of helplessness for chronic conditions

2022· article· en· W4220782147 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePAIN Reports · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Education
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLearned helplessnessMeasure (data warehouse)Chronic diseasePsychometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Learned helplessness develops with prolonged exposure to uncontrollable stressors and is therefore germane to individuals living with pain or other poorly controlled chronic diseases. This study has developed a helplessness scale for chronic conditions distinct from previous scales that blur the conceptualization of control constructs. Extant measures commonly examine controllability, not the three pillars of helplessness identified by Maier and Seligman (1976): cognitive, emotional, and motivational/motor deficits. Methods: Individuals who self-report a chronic pain condition (N = 350) responded to a Chronic Disease Helplessness Survey (CDHS) constructed to capture cognitive, motivational/motor, and emotion deficits. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA; N = 200) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA; N = 150) were performed. The CDHS was assessed for convergent and discriminant validity. Results: A three-factor solution corresponding to cognitive, emotional, and motivational/motor factors was identified by EFA. The solution exhibited sufficient model fit and each factor had a high degree of internal consistency. The CDHS was significantly associated with greater pain intensity and interference, PCS helplessness, lower perceived pain control, and lower general self-efficacy. Individuals with diabetes generally experience greater control strategies over daily symptoms (e.g., diet, oral medications, and insulin) than patients with chronic pain and in this study displayed significantly lower CDHS scores compared to individuals with chronic pain, demonstrating discriminant validity. Conclusions: This study provides preliminary evidence that the three-factor CDHS is a psychometrically sound measure of helplessness in individuals with chronic pain.

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.416

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.268 · 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