MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410023242 · doi:10.1016/j.jpain.2025.105413

When pain overwhelms the self: A phenomenological study of a new mode of suffering, based on adults’ recollections of their worst pain episodes

2025· article· en· W4410023242 on OpenAlexafffund
Peter Stilwell, Mael Gagnon-Mailhot, Anne Hudon, Virginia McIntyre, Keith Meldrum, M. Gabrielle Pagé, Shaun Gallagher, Timothy H. Wideman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pain · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMental Health and Psychiatry
Canadian institutionsInterior HealthCanadian Patient Safety InstituteCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalUniversité de MontréalCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
FundersH2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie ActionsHORIZON EUROPE Marie Sklodowska-Curie ActionsRéseau québécois de recherche sur la douleurFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSocial Sciences and Humanities Research CouncilLouise and Alan Edwards Foundation
KeywordsPsychologyPhenomenological methodMode (computer interface)PsychotherapistMedicinePhysical therapyPsychoanalysisPhilosophyEpistemologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Suffering is a foundational yet understudied construct within the field of pain. There is general agreement that pain-related suffering involves disruption to one's sense of self. The selfhood literature characterizes two inter-related modes of self-experience. One mode entails in-the-moment experiences that shape one's stream of consciousness; another involves self-reflective thoughts about the past or expected future, related to self-narratives and identity. The field's current conceptualization of pain-related suffering is exclusively anchored to the latter, self-reflective mode of experience. Our past work argues that this framing fails to account for pain's immediate, disruptive impact and denies the potential for suffering among individuals without self-reflective capacities (e.g. infants). The purpose of this theoretically-informed, phenomenological study was to explore a new potential way by which people living with pain can suffer. We conducted in-depth, qualitative interviews with 12 adults across Canada living with various pain conditions. Interviews focused on understanding the moment-to-moment experiences of their worst episodes of pain. Results revealed important accounts of pain that overwhelmed thoughts and self-reflective capacities and disrupted foundational aspects of self-experience, including senses of agency, bodily ownership and time. Participants reported that these experiences were incapacitating, dehumanizing and dissociating. The findings are remarkably similar to first-hand accounts of torture and support a new mode of pain-related suffering that does not require self-reflection and is characterized by an immediate, disruptive impact on one's sense of self. Findings will inform the development of the first theoretically-informed and evidence-based definition of pain-related suffering and help advance pain theory and practice. PERSPECTIVE: This qualitative phenomenological study characterizes how pain can radically transform one's in-the-moment sense of self. Results reveal a new mode of pain-related suffering that does not require self-reflection. This supports the expansion of traditional understandings of suffering, exclusively anchored to self-reflection, to now include two inter-related modes of pain-related suffering.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.009
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.005
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations8
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of PainSame topicMental Health and PsychiatryFrench-language works237,207