Virtual group psychotherapy for chronic pain: exploring the impact of the virtual medium on participants’ experiences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Virtual psychotherapy for chronic pain (CP) has been shown to be feasible, efficacious, and acceptable; however, little is known about how virtual delivery of group psychotherapy affects participants' experiences. This study aimed to explore the impact of a virtual medium during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on social interactions and therapeutic processes in the context of group psychotherapy for CP management. METHODS: This qualitative, interview-based study collected data on 18 individuals who participated in virtual group psychotherapy in a tertiary care pain management unit. RESULTS: Results of the thematic analysis showed 4 themes. First, the ability to participate and connect was modified by not meeting in person. Connections also occurred differently as the usual patterns of interactions changed. Participants described important shifts in how emotions are communicated and subsequent experience of empathy. Finally, the commonality of chronic pain experience was identified as a central driver of connection between participants. CONCLUSIONS: Mixed impacts of the virtual medium on group psychotherapy dynamics and processes were found. Future research could explore ways to mitigate the negative impacts.
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 | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".