MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406410812 · doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2025.115434

Differences in sensorimotor integration, cervical sensorimotor control, and cognitive-motor dual tasking costs in chronic non-specific neck pain patients with high vs. low catastrophizing tendencies compared to healthy controls

2025· article· en· W4406410812 on OpenAlexaff
Ibrahim M. Moustafa, Amal Ahbouch, Shima A. Mohammad Zadeh, Tamer Shousha, Paul A. Oakley, Deed E. Harrison

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioural Brain Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionPsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSensory systemMotor controlChronic painSomatosensory systemNeuroscienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic non-specific neck pain (CNSNP) is a common condition and its relationship to the pain catastrophizing construct in terms of sensorimotor functions and dual task performance is not fully understood. We aimed to investigate the differences in sensorimotor integration, cervical sensorimotor control, and cognitive-motor dual tasking abilities between CNSNP patients (> 3 months) with high versus low catastrophizing tendencies and healthy controls. Ninety participants were recruited, 30 asymptomatic controls, and 60 patients with CNSNP; 30 scoring high (> 75th percentile) and 30 scoring low (< 25th percentile) on the pain catastrophizing scale (PCS). The variables of sensorimotor integration (frontal N30 amplitude), cervical sensorimotor control (head repositioning accuracy (HRA) - left and right), and cognitive-motor dual tasking (percentage of gait speed time increase with a cognitive load) were assessed and compared across groups. In general, performance of sensorimotor integration, cervical sensorimotor control, and cognitive-motor dual tasking abilities was incrementally better comparing the high to low catastrophizing groups, and the low catastrophizing group to the controls. Correlation coefficients between PCS and HRA (left and right) was strong (r = .8, p < 0.001), between PCS and dual tasking cost was moderate (r = .7, p < 0.001), and between PCS and frontal N30 amplitude was moderate (r = .57, p < 0.001). In conclusion, we found that higher pain catastrophizing was associated with poorer sensorimotor integration, cervical sensorimotor control, and cognitive-motor dual tasking in CNSNP patients highlighting the importance of both assessing and treating catastrophizing in the treatment of CNSNP. PERSPECTIVE: This study highlights the significant impact of pain catastrophizing on sensorimotor integration, cervical sensorimotor control, and cognitive-motor dual tasking in CNSNP patients. High catastrophizers are particularly vulnerable to these impairments, suggesting the need for comprehensive treatment approaches that address both psychological as well as physical components.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.302 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehavioural Brain ResearchSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207