A prognostic risk score for development and spread of chronic pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic pain is a complex condition influenced by a combination of biological, psychological and social factors. Using data from the UK Biobank (n = 493,211), we showed that pain spreads from proximal to distal sites and developed a biopsychosocial model that predicted the number of coexisting pain sites. This data-driven model was used to identify a risk score that classified various chronic pain conditions (area under the curve (AUC) 0.70-0.88) and pain-related medical conditions (AUC 0.67-0.86). In longitudinal analyses, the risk score predicted the development of widespread chronic pain, the spreading of chronic pain across body sites and high-impact pain about 9 years later (AUC 0.68-0.78). Key risk factors included sleeplessness, feeling 'fed-up', tiredness, stressful life events and a body mass index >30. A simplified version of this score, named the risk of pain spreading, obtained similar predictive performance based on six simple questions with binarized answers. The risk of pain spreading was then validated in the Northern Finland Birth Cohort (n = 5,525) and the PREVENT-AD cohort (n = 178), obtaining comparable predictive performance. Our findings show that chronic pain conditions can be predicted from a common set of biopsychosocial factors, which can aid in tailoring research protocols, optimizing patient randomization in clinical trials and improving pain management.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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".