Task‐based measures of sensitivity to physical activity predict daily life pain and mood among people living with back pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clinical interventions aim to improve the daily life experiences of patients. However, past research has highlighted important discrepancies between commonly used assessments (e.g. retrospective questionnaires) and patients' daily life experiences of pain. These gaps may contribute to flawed clinical decision-making and ineffective care. Recent work suggests that real-time, task-based clinical assessments may help reduce these discrepancies by adding predictive value in explaining daily life pain experiences. This study aimed to investigate these relationships by evaluating whether task-based measures of sensitivity to physical activity (SPA) predict daily life pain and mood, beyond traditional pain-related questionnaires. METHODS: Adults with back pain (<6-month onset) answered pain-related questionnaires and completed a standardized lifting task. SPA-Pain, SPA-Sensory and SPA-Mood were, respectively, assessed as task-evoked changes in pain intensity, pressure pain threshold (back, hands), situational catastrophizing. Over the next 9 days, daily life pain and mood were assessed using smartphone-based ecological momentary assessment (EMA-Pain and EMA-Mood, respectively) with stratified random sampling. Data analyses estimated fixed effects (b) using multilevel linear modelling with random intercepts. RESULTS: Median EMA completion per participant was 66.67% (n = 67 participants). After controlling for covariates, SPA-Pain was associated with EMA-Pain (b = 0.235, p = 0.002) and SPA-Psych approached significance with EMA-Mood (b = -0.159, p = 0.052). CONCLUSIONS: Task-based assessment of SPA helps explain daily life pain and mood among adults with back pain, beyond traditional questionnaires. Adding task-based assessment of SPA may achieve a more complete picture of pain and mood in daily life, offering clinicians better guidance when prescribing activity-based interventions that are designed to modify daily life behaviour, such as graded activity. SIGNIFICANCE: This study found that, among people with back pain, task-based measures of sensitivity to physical activity contribute additional predictive value for daily life pain and mood beyond self-report questionnaires. Findings suggest that real-time, task-based measures may help mitigate some of the shortcomings that are commonly associated with retrospective questionnaires.
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 | 0.029 | 0.011 |
| 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; 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".