A preliminary examination of the effects of childhood abuse and resilience on pain and physical functioning in patients with knee osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We examined associations of a self-reported history of childhood abuse with pain and physical functioning in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) awaiting total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We also explored the potential moderating effects of positive childhood experiences (PCEs), an index of resilience, on these associations. METHODS: = 239) completed self-report measures of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), PCEs, pain, and physical functioning. We evaluated associations of pain and physical functioning (Brief Pain Inventory [BPI] and Western Ontario and McMaster University of Osteoarthritis Index [WOMAC]) based on the experience of ACEs (childhood abuse), with PCEs (childhood happiness and supportive parental care) as potential moderators. RESULTS: Greater exposure to childhood abuse was positively correlated with BPI pain interference as well as WOMAC pain and functioning scores. Additionally, childhood happiness and supportive parental care moderated the positive associations of childhood abuse with pain and physical functioning; though, surprisingly, the adverse effects of childhood abuse on these outcomes were more pronounced among participants with high levels of childhood happiness and supportive parental care. CONCLUSION: Overall, results show an association between a self-reported history of childhood abuse and pain and functioning in patients with KOA awaiting TKA. However, PCEs did not protect against the negative consequences of childhood abuse in our cohort. Further research is needed to validate these associations and gain a more comprehensive understanding of the complex interplay between childhood abuse and PCEs and their potential influences on pain experiences in adults with chronic pain conditions, including KOA.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".