CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 126Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationMental Health Research TopicsPediatric Pain Management Techniques

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Reactive effects of diary self-assessment in chronic pain patients

Cruise, Charles E., Broderick, Joan, Porter, Laura, Kaell, Alan, Stone, Arthur A.·1996·Pain
DOI 10.1016/0304-3959(96)03125-9
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Several studies of experimental and acute clinical pain have indicated reactive effects of self-assessment on pain intensity and tolerance. A recent study of chronic pain patients (vonBaeyer 1994), however, failed to show these effects. The present investigation sought to determine whether reactive effects can be produced in chronic pain patients by an intensive self-assessment protocol. Using the methodology of ecological momentary assessment (EMA; Stone and Shiffman 1994), thirty-five chronic rheumatoid arthritis patients completed diaries of pain and mood seven times a day for 1 wk. Eighteen patients were included in the final sample because they responded to at least half of the number of hourly prompts for each of the 7 days. Using repeated measures analysis of the daily means, no significant effects of time were found for any measures. Reactive effects that result in an average change in pain levels over time, therefore, do not appear to be produced by intensive self-assessment in a naturalistic context. Results are discussed in terms of cognitive and behavioral theories of pain reactivity.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0304-3959(96)03125-9

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Bolton, 1991, Validierung elektronischer an konventionellen Schmerztagebu¨chern, Z. Rheumatol., 50, 55
  2. Brackertz, 1991, Realzeiterfaßte Schmerzzeitprofile unter der Behandlung mit Ibuprofen, Z. Rheumatol., 50, 39
  3. Bru¨ckle, 1991, Schmerzverlauf und -topographie bei generalisierten Tendomyopathien, Z. Rheumatol., 50, 19

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 126

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Cruise, C. E., Broderick, J., Porter, L., Kaell, A., & Stone, A. A.
Affiliations
  • State University of New York (US)
  • Stony Brook University (US)
Corresponding author
Stone, Arthur A.
ORCID
Venue
Pain
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
1996-10
Volume
67
Issue
2
Pages
253-258
ISSN
0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/0304-3959(96)03125-9
OpenAlex
W1965958056
Cited by
126
References
48
Citations by year
2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 9
FWCI
1.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
Keywords
chronic pain, pain intensity, pain tolerance, rheumatoid arthritis, ecological momentary assessment, pain reactivity
MeSH terms
Adult, Affect, Aged, Arthritis, Rheumatoid, Chronic Disease, Female, Humans, Male, Medical Records, Middle Aged, Pain, Self-Assessment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review