Cited by 20Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsPain Mechanisms and Treatments

Developing a psychologically-informed pain management course for use in osteopathic practice: the OsteoMAP cohort study

Abbey, Hilary, Nanke, Lorraine, Brownhill, Kevin·2021·International journal of osteopathic medicine

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijosm.2020.09.002

Cites

81 of 81 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Abbey, H., Nanke, L., & Brownhill, K.
Affiliations
University College of Osteopathy (GB)
Corresponding author
Abbey, Hilary
Venue
International journal of osteopathic medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-03
Volume
39
Pages
32-40
ISSN
1746-0689 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3087211984
Cited by
20
References
81
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3
FWCI
1.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
International journal of osteopathic medicine (publishedVersion)
Funders
Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety, UK Government
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
Keywords
chronic musculoskeletal pain, pain self-management, acceptance and commitment therapy, mindfulness, psychological flexibility, quality of life, pain coping, multidisciplinary pain management

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