The DOI matches its Crossref record; 67 of the 71 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A 2-Item Short Form of the Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire: Development and Psychometric Evaluation of PSEQ-2
Open accessAbstract
Unlabelled The Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ) is an established 10-item measure of pain self-efficacy that is widely used in clinical and research settings. However, a shorter measure would reduce patient and researcher burden and save valuable time in busy clinical settings. The aim of this study was to develop and confirm the psychometric properties of a valid and reliable 2-item short form of the PSEQ (PSEQ-2). We used a large sample of 1,418 chronic pain patients, which we randomly split into 2 smaller groups. We identified the 2 short-form items in Sample 1 and confirmed their properties in Sample 2. In order to identify the 2 items for the short-form measure, we selected the first item based on the highest item-total correlation. The second item was identified after a series of additional analyses. The 2 items identified from the PSEQ reflected confidence in one's ability to work and lead a normal life despite pain. The PSEQ-2's validity and internal consistency were found to be sound. Test-retest reliability, sensitivity to change, and convergent validity were confirmed in a separate patient sample (n = 140) that had recently completed an intervention designed, in part, to modify self-efficacy beliefs. The PSEQ-2 appears to be a robust measure of pain self-efficacy.Perspective Pain self-efficacy is a belief in one's ability to carry out activities even when in pain and is important in coping effectively with pain. A short measure of pain self-efficacy was developed and evaluated. It appears to be suitable for use in clinical and research settings.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“pain self-efficacy items are based on the Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire.67”
From Development, evaluation and implementation of a digital behavioural health treatment for chronic pain: study protocol of the multiphase DAHLIA project (2022) · cites this paper as [67]
Citations
Cites
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1983) · Cited by 79,882
Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change
Bandura, A. (1977) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.2.191 · Cited by 43,925
Lovibond, P. F., & Lovibond, S. H. (1995) · Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/0005-7967(94)00075-u · Cited by 14,523
The PHQ-9: A New Depression Diagnostic and Severity Measure
Kroenke, K., & Spitzer, R. L. (2002) · Psychiatric Annals · doi:10.3928/0048-5713-20020901-06 · Cited by 5,898
Anxiety disorders in primary care: prevalence, impairment, comorbidity, and detection
Kroenke, K., Spitzer, R. L., Williams, J. B. W., Monahan, P. O., & Löwe, B. (2007) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-146-5-200703060-00004 · Cited by 4,741
Core outcome measures for chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations
Dworkin, R. H., Turk, D. C., Farrar, J. T., Haythornthwaite, J. A., Jensen, M. P., Katz, N. P., Kerns, R. D., Stucki, G., Allen, R. R., Bellamy, N., et al. (2005) · Pain · doi:10.1016/j.pain.2004.09.012 · Cited by 3,732
Core outcome domains for chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations
Turk, D. C., Dworkin, R. H., Allen, R. R., Bellamy, N., Brandenburg, N., Carr, D. B., Cleeland, C., Dionne, R., Farrar, J. T., Galer, B. S., et al. (2003) · Pain · doi:10.1016/j.pain.2003.08.001 · Cited by 3,510
A Study of the Natural History of Back Pain: Part I
ROLAND, M., & MORRIS, R. (1983) · Spine · doi:10.1097/00007632-198303000-00004 · Cited by 3,395
The West Haven-Yale Multidimensional Pain Inventory (WHYMPI)
Kerns, R. D., Turk, D. C., & Rudy, T. E. (1985) · Pain · doi:10.1016/0304-3959(85)90004-1 · Cited by 2,128
Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioural change?
Teasdale, J. D. (1978) · Advances in Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/0146-6402(78)90009-7 · Cited by 2,038
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Cohen, 2000, Medical assessment and management of work-related low back or neck-arm pain: More questions than answers, J Occup Health Saf, 16, 307
- Jacobson, 1988, Statistics for assessing clinical significance of psychotherapy techniques: Issues, problems, and new developments, Behav Assess, 19, 133
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Assessment of Psychosocial and Functional Impact of Chronic Pain
Turk, D. C., Fillingim, R. B., Ohrbach, R., & Patel, K. V. (2016) · The Journal of Pain · doi:10.1016/j.jpain.2016.02.006 · Cited by 350
Garcia, L. M., Birckhead, B. J., Krishnamurthy, P., Sackman, J., Mackey, I. G., Louis, R. G., Salmasi, V., Maddox, T., & Darnall, B. D. (2021) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/26292 · Cited by 241
“For general pain self-efficacy, the 2-item Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ-2) is a validated instrument used to assess respondents’confidence in their ability to engage in various daily activities despite their chronic pain [68].”
Darnall, B. D., Krishnamurthy, P., Tsuei, J., & Minor, J. D. (2020) · JMIR Formative Research · doi:10.2196/17293 · Cited by 162
“Aligning with IMMPACT recommendations for pain research [48], Patient Global Impression of Change was assessed on day 22 (posttreatment survey) using the question, “Since the beginning of the study, how has your pain changed?” on a 7-point scale, ranging from much worse to much better.”
BackgroundMethodChiarotto, A., Vanti, C., Cedraschi, C., Ferrari, S., de Lima e Sà Resende, F., Ostelo, R. W., & Pillastrini, P. (2016) · The Journal of Pain · doi:10.1016/j.jpain.2016.02.012 · Cited by 128
Lentz, T. A., Beneciuk, J. M., Bialosky, J. E., Zeppieri, G., Dai, Y., Wu, S. S., & George, S. Z. (2016) · Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy · doi:10.2519/jospt.2016.6487 · Cited by 137
Metadata
- Authors
- Nicholas, M. K., McGuire, B. E., & Asghari, A.
- Affiliations
- The University of Sydney (AU)
- Ollscoil na Gaillimhe – University of Galway (IE)
- Shahed University (IR)
- Corresponding author
- Nicholas, Michael K.
- Venue
- The Journal of Pain
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015-02
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 153-163
- ISSN
- 1526-5900 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1975558470
- Cited by
- 241
- References
- 71
- Citations by year
- 2026: 21 · 2025: 35 · 2024: 38 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 3.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Pain (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Keywords
- pain self-efficacy, Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire, short-form questionnaire, chronic pain, psychometric properties, test-retest reliability, sensitivity to change, convergent validity, internal consistency, pain coping, self-efficacy measurement
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Aged, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pain, Phobic Disorders, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Sensitivity and Specificity, Reproducibility of Results, Self Efficacy, Catastrophization
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
