Cited by 82Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

Psychological flexibility, acceptance and commitment therapy, and chronic pain

Scott, Whitney, McCracken, Lance M·2015·Current Opinion in Psychology

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.copsyc.2014.12.013

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 61 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Scott, W., & McCracken, L. M.
Affiliations
  • King's College London (GB)
  • St Thomas' Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
McCracken, Lance M
Venue
Current Opinion in Psychology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-04
Volume
2
Pages
91-96
ISSN
2352-250X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2025329611
Cited by
82
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 3
FWCI
1.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Current Opinion in Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
International Association for the Study of Pain
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
acceptance and commitment therapy, psychological flexibility, chronic pain, mindfulness-based interventions, cognitive behavioral therapy, treatment process, outcome measures, intervention fidelity, access to treatment

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