Pain beliefs and their relationship with pain, psychological distress and catastrophizing in individuals with Parkinson’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Parkinson’s disease (PD), a large number of individuals are confronted with pain. This issue has been receiving increasing attention in literature in recent years, as the complexity of pain in this disease makes its evaluation and treatment challenging. However, psychological variables related to the pain experience have received limited attention, especially when it comes to the exploration of beliefs regarding pain which, to our knowledge, remains unexplored in PD. Pain beliefs are defined as a subset of a patient’s belief system which represents a personal understanding of the pain experience. Four dimensions of pain beliefs have been isolated in literature: mystery, pain permanence, pain constancy and self-blame. Thus, the goal of this study was first to describe pain beliefs in individuals with PD and second, to explore the relationships between pain beliefs and clinical and psychological variables. One hundred and sixty-nine international individuals with PD completed an online survey with socio-demographic and medical data. Participants completed self-report instruments to assess their pain (King’s Parkinson’s Disease Pain Questionnaire, McGill Pain Questionnaire and Brief Pain Inventory), psychological distress (Beck Depression Inventory, short-form and Parkinson Anxiety Scale), pain catastrophizing (Pain Catastrophizing Scale) and pain beliefs catastrophizing (Pain Beliefs and Perception Inventory). The study’s findings revealed that most participants’ beliefs are marked by the dimension of permanence, suggesting that individuals with PD perceive the pain experience as chronic and enduring. Meanwhile, pain is minimally perceived as constant, mysterious, or a source of guilt. Our finding concerning the permanence dimension deserves specific attention: even though this belief is prevalent in our population, it is not, or only weakly, associated with an impact on mood or pain catastrophizing. These results bring forth several hypotheses for understanding, highlighting the role of acceptance, and offer new perspectives toward improving clinical practices in terms of assessing and managing pain in PD.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".