Psychometric Properties of the Arabic Version of the Pain Resilience Scale among Lebanese Adults with Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. The Pain Resilience Scale (PRS), which measures behavioral perseverance and the ability to regulate emotions and cognition despite ongoing pain, lacks an Arabic version. Objectives. This study aimed to translate, culturally adapt, and validate an Arabic version of the Pain Resilience Scale (PRS‐A) among Lebanese adults. Methods. Phase 1 involved translation and cross‐cultural adaptation of the PRS into Arabic. Phase 2 examined the reliability and validity of the PRS‐A. A convenience sample of 154 Lebanese adults with chronic musculoskeletal pain completed the PRS‐A and self‐report measures of pain catastrophizing, pain self‐efficacy, pain intensity and interference, depression and anxiety, and quality of life. Results. The PRS‐A yielded a two‐factor structure with factor 1 representing “cognitive/affective positivity” and factor 2 representing “behavioral perseverance,” accounting for 41.93% and 15.15% of the variance in pain resilience, respectively. Total PRS‐A score (M = 33.20 and SD = 9.90) showed significant correlations with pain catastrophizing (M = 27.65, SD = 13.03, and r = −0.52), pain self‐efficacy (median = 9.00, IQR = 4, and rho = 0.61), pain intensity (M = 4.50, SD = 2.25, and r = −0.28), pain interference (M = 4.30, SD = 2.89, and r = −0.56), physical (M = 34.95, SD = 9.52, and r = 0.34) and mental (M = 40.08, SD = 12.49, and r = 0.58) health functioning, anxiety (median = 7.00, IQR = 7, and rho = −0.57), and depression (median = 4.00, IQR = 6, and rho = −0.58). PRS‐A subscale was also significantly related to all measures except pain intensity, which was correlated with cognitive/affective positivity (r = −0.33) but not behavioral perseverance (r = −0.09). Cronbach’s alpha for the PRS‐A was 0.87. Conclusion. The PRS‐A demonstrated validity and acceptable reliability among Arab‐speaking individuals with chronic musculoskeletal pain, suggesting its potential utility for assessing pain resilience within this population.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".