Identifying Psychosocial, Self-Management, and Health Profiles Among Women With Chronic Pain Who Have Experienced Intimate Partner Violence and Those Who Have Not: Protocol for a 2-Phase Qualitative and Cross-Sectional Study Using AI Techniques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Women who experience intimate partner violence (IPV) are more likely to develop disabling chronic pain (CP). However, there is little information on what it means to live with CP while being exposed to IPV. In addition, despite well-established risk and protective factors for CP and its health outcomes, there are no data on whether these factors differ in women who have experienced IPV compared to those who have not. OBJECTIVE: Our aims are to understand the meaning and implications of living with CP for women who have experienced IPV compared to women with CP alone and to identify possible differences in risk and protective factors as well as health outcomes. METHODS: We have designed 2 studies to be conducted in 2 phases. The first phase will involve a qualitative study with a descriptive and exploratory design. Individual semistructured interviews will be conducted with at least 10 women with CP alone and with 10 women with CP who have experienced IPV. Reflexive thematic analysis will be used to examine participants' experiences, meanings, and realities. In the second phase, a cross-sectional study will be conducted with women with CP affected by IPV, including those currently experiencing IPV and those with past exposure to IPV, as well as women with CP who have never experienced IPV. A total of 359 women will complete various scales assessing risk and protective factors (eg, pain-related worrying and activity patterns) and health outcomes (eg, legal and illegal drug use and health care use). Data analysis will involve inferential statistics and machine learning. RESULTS: As of May 2025, we had contacted relevant associations to present the project and begin recruiting voluntary participants. We have conducted the pilot study to assure the adequacy of the questionnaire and usability or technical functionality of the web-based platform. The results are expected to be published starting in January 2026. CONCLUSIONS: This research addresses two urgent needs in pain research identified by the European Pain Federation: (1) expanding knowledge on CP management in relation to contextual factors; and (2) identifying specific psychosocial, self-management, and health profiles among women with CP who have experienced IPV and those who have not. This could provide valuable insights for personalizing pain management treatments. In addition, the findings may help identify women experiencing IPV who present to health care settings. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/66396.
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 | 0.041 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.004 |
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".