Patient-Reported Pain Distributions in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Impact on Patient Psychosocial Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a painful chronic gastrointestinal disease associated with diminished quality of life. No research documents IBD body pain or the associations of pain patterns to outcomes. Objectives were to map patient body pain areas and examine the associations between pain patterns with depression, catastrophizing, pain severity, and quality of life. A cross-sectional survey was collected from consecutive tertiary-care IBD clinic patients ( n = 255). Patients were classified into three pain pattern groups (No Pain; Localized Pain Only; and Widespread Pain) with more than 40% reporting widespread pain. The Localized Pain Only and Widespread Pain groups reported pain in the abdomen, the uterus/testes, vagina/penis, bladder, and pelvis/buttock areas. The body area most often reported was the anterior abdomen for the Localized Pain Only and Widespread Pain groups, with additional endorsement of lower back and anterior thigh and knees for the Widespread Pain group. The pain versus no pain patients reported greater depressive symptoms, catastrophizing, and diminished quality of life. Patients reported a variety of pain patterns during clinic visits. Widespread pain is associated with greatest pain and poorest psychosocial outcomes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".