Pain catastrophizing and worry about health in generalized anxiety disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Because the diagnostic criteria of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) are not tied to specific worry domains (worry is 'generalized'), research on the content of worry in GAD is lacking. To our knowledge, no study has addressed vulnerability for specific worry topics in GAD. The goal of the current study, a secondary analysis of data from a clinical trial, is to explore the relationship between pain catastrophizing and worry about health in a sample of 60 adults with primary GAD. All data for this study were collected at pretest, prior to randomization to experimental condition in the larger trial. The hypotheses were that (1) pain catastrophizing would be positively related to the severity of GAD, (2) the relationship between pain catastrophizing and the severity of GAD would not be explained by intolerance of uncertainty and psychological rigidity, and (3) pain catastrophizing would be greater in participants reporting worry about health compared to those not reporting worry about health. All hypotheses were confirmed, suggesting that pain catastrophizing may be a threat-specific vulnerability for health-related worry in GAD. The implications of the current findings include a better understanding of the ideographic content of worry, which could help focus treatment interventions for individuals with GAD.
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 | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".