MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386179094 · doi:10.22259/2638-5201.0302003

Inappropriate Use of the Modified Somatic Perception Questionnaire (MSPQ) to Diagnose Malingering

2020· article· en· W4386179094 on OpenAlexaff
Zack Z. Cernovsky, David M. Diamond, James D. Mendonça, Jack Remo Ferrari

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMalingeringPsychologyPerceptionClinical psychologyPsychiatryMedicineApplied psychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The Modified Somatic Perception Questionnaire (MSPQ) is frequently used by psychologists contracted by car insurance companies as a measure of malingering medical symptoms.The MSPQ has not been validated on patients injured in car accidents: the use of MSPQ on that patient group deserves methodological scrutiny.Method: The overlap of individual MSPQ items with symptoms typically reported by patients injured in motor vehicle accidents (MVAs) was examined, including also the post-concussive and whiplash symptoms and signs of autonomic dysregulation as often noted with unrelenting pain, pain related insomnia, and sudden spikes of stabbing back or neck pain.Results: About two-thirds of MSPQ items (8 of the 13 scored items, i.e., 61.3%) show a definite overlap with medical symptoms legitimately experienced by post-MVA patients.Three of these, the dizziness, blurring of vision, and nausea, are listed in the widely used Rivermead Post-Concussion Symptoms scale where they are scored correctly as indicators of the post-concussion syndrome, not as signs of malingering.Three other items, "Muscles in neck aching," "Legs feeling weak," and "Muscles twitching or jumping", can be considered as associated with whiplash injury to cervical spine or also with sprain or strain of other tissues, and the associated fatigue.Furthermore, symptoms of "Feeling hot all over" and Sweating all over" are familiar to persons who experienced sudden episodes of excruciating back pain.Discussion: Symptoms similar to post-MVA patients are also experienced by patients with industrial injuries such as on construction sites, and also in war veterans who sustained concussive and whiplash injuries in their exposure to violent blasts.These patients are particularly vulnerable to being falsely diagnosed as malingerers (or expressed in other words, as magnifying or exaggerating their symptoms).Conclusions: Using the MSPQ as a test of malingering on such (or on similar) clinical groups constitutes malpractice.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Psychiatry and Behavioral SciencesSame topicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207