MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7033415589

Prevalence of Chronic Pain among Military Veterans and Research Priorities among Military Veterans Living with Chronic Pain

2021· dissertation· en· W7033415589 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMacSphere (McMaster University) · 2021
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicPomegranate: compositions and health benefits
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneralizability theoryChronic painObservational studyVeterans AffairsPrevalenceSubgroup analysisConfidence intervalMeta-analysisMEDLINE
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: There is uncertainty in the prevalence of chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) in military veterans. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to elucidate this issue, and examine potential effect modifiers of CNCP prevalence. Additionally, chronic pain is a pervasive and debilitating condition that disproportionately affects military veterans. We recently completed a qualitative study of Canadian veterans living with chronic pain to identify their research priorities; however, the generalizability of our findings was uncertain. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science were searched from 2013 to January 21, 2021, for observational studies reporting “chronic pain” or pain ≥ 3 months in military veterans. The random-effects meta-analysis was used for pooling data, the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach was used for rating quality of evidence, and the Instrument to Assess the Credibility of Effect Modification Analyses was used to rate credibility of the subgroup analyses. Furthermore, from January to March 2021, we emailed a 45-item cross-sectional survey to a list of Canadian veterans that asked about the relative importance of 20 research priorities regarding chronic pain. We explored for statistical significance between male and female responses for any item in which the proportion of endorsement showed a ≥10% difference. RESULTS: 41 observational studies with 5,550,375 military veterans were included. The overall pooled CNCP prevalence is 34% (95% confidence interval (CI) 25% to 45%). However, significant subgroup effect was found for type of prevalence measure (generic or specific) among military veterans (test of interaction p=0.007, moderate subgroup credibility): the pooled generic CNCP prevalence of 43%, 95% CI 29% to 57% (Low-certainty evidence) vs. the pooled specific type of CNCP prevalence of 14%, 95% CI 6.7% to 23% (Moderate-certainty evidence). A multivariable meta-regression model adjusted for proportion lost to follow-up found the type of prevalence measure to be the only significant predictor of CNCP prevalence (p < 0.0001). 313 of 699 Canadian military veterans living with chronic pain completed ≥50% of the survey (45% response rate). Respondents were predominantly male (77%) with a median age of 52 (interquartile range [IQR] 44-58). All 20 research priorities listed in the survey were endorsed as very important by ≥52% of respondents, and three received endorsement by ≥85%: (I) optimizing chronic pain management after release from the military; and (II) identifying and (III) treating mental illness among veterans living with chronic pain. Women were more likely than men to endorse research on post-surgical care for chronic pain prevention or research on holistic care for chronic pain. Men were more likely than women to endorse research on physical activity or exercise for chronic pain. Individuals with higher gross income (≥$80,000) were less likely to endorse research into physiotherapy for chronic pain, or chiropractic for chronic pain compared to those with lower gross income. Individuals with greater age are less likely to endorse research on medical cannabis for chronic pain. CONCLUSIONS: The overall prevalence of CNCP is 34% among military veterans. For generic CNCP, the prevalence is 43%; for a given subtype of CNCP, the prevalence is 11%. Methodologically robust studies are required to more precisely determine CNCP prevalence. The most salient research priorities among our respondents were optimizing chronic pain management during service and after discharge from the military, including co-morbid mental illness. Differences in gender, gross income, and age are implicated in the endorsement of therapy-related priorities, which include surgery, physical activity or exercise, chiropractic, and medical cannabis. Our findings provide insight into the research priorities of Canadian military veterans living with chronic pain. These findings should be considered by granting agencies when formulating calls for proposals, and by researchers who wish to undertake research that will address the needs of military veterans living with chronic pain.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.727
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMacSphere (McMaster University)Same topicPomegranate: compositions and health benefitsFrench-language works237,207