Conditioned pain modulation, kinesiophobia, and pain catastrophizing as prognostic factors for chronicity in a population with acute low back pain: An exploratory prospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Psychosocial factors and alteration of the somatosensory functions have been associated with persistent low back pain (LBP). A decreased capacity of the central nervous system to modulate pain has been suggested as a potential contributor to the persistence of pain. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether conditioned pain modulation (CPM), initial symptoms/disability, kinesiophobia, and pain catastrophizing is associated with the transition from acute to chronic LBP. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. METHOD: Fifty participants presenting with acute LBP (<6 weeks) took part in three evaluation sessions (baseline, 3 and 6 months). At baseline and 3-month evaluations, all participants completed self-administered questionnaires (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], Short Form of Brief Pain Inventory [BPI-SF], Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia [TSK] and Pain Catastrophizing Scale [PCS]) and CPM was assessed. At the 6-month evaluation, questionnaires were readministered, and participants were dichotomized according to their status (Non-chronic LBP [NCLBP] or chronic LBP [CLBP]). Univariate tests were used to compare baseline variables between NCLBP and CLBP. RESULTS: No significant baseline difference was found for TSK (p = 0.48), PCS (p = 0.78), CPM (p = 0.82), ODI (p = 0.78), BPI-SF severity (p = 0.50), and interference subscales (p = 0.54) between those categorized as NCLBP or CLBP at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory study failed to support the hypothesis that inefficient CPM mechanisms and the presence of psychological factors could be factors associated with the transition to chronic pain in individuals with acute LBP.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".