Cited by 66Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationResilience and Mental HealthPediatric Pain Management Techniques

Validation of the Pain Resilience Scale in a chronic pain sample

Open access
Ankawi, Brett, Slepian, P. Maxwell, Himawan, Lina K., France, Christopher R.·2017·The Journal of Pain

Abstract

Psychosocial factors that protect against negative outcomes for individuals with chronic pain have received increased attention in recent years. Pain resilience, or the ability to maintain behavioral engagement and regulate emotions as well as cognitions despite prolonged or intense pain, is one such factor. A measure of pain-specific resilience, the Pain Resilience Scale, was previously identified as a better predictor of acute pain tolerance than general resilience. The present study sought to validate this measure in a chronic pain sample, while also furthering understanding of the role of pain resilience compared with other protective factors. Participants with chronic pain completed online questionnaires to assess factors related to positive pain outcomes, pain vulnerability, pain intensity, and quality of life. A confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the 2-factor structure of the Pain Resilience Scale previously observed among respondents without chronic pain, although one item from each subscale was dropped in the final version. For this chronic pain sample, structural equation modeling showed that pain resilience contributes unique variance to a model including pain acceptance and pain self-efficacy in predicting quality of life and pain intensity. Further, pain resilience was a better fit in this model than general resilience, strengthening the argument for assessing pain resilience over general resilience.Perspective A modified version of the Pain Resilience Scale retained the original factor structure when tested in a chronic pain sample. Construct validity was supported by expected relationships with pain-related protective and vulnerability measures. Further, a model including positive pain constructs showed that pain resilience accounts for unique variability when predicting quality of life and pain intensity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jpain.2017.03.013

Cites

52 of 52 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

1 of the 53 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ankawi, B., Slepian, P. M., Himawan, L. K., & France, C. R.
Affiliations
Ohio University (US)
Corresponding author
France, Christopher R.
Venue
The Journal of Pain
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-08
Volume
18
Issue
8
Pages
984-993
ISSN
1526-5900 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2607392230
Cited by
66
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1
FWCI
3.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Resilience and Mental Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
Keywords
pain resilience, chronic pain, psychosocial protective factors, pain acceptance, pain self-efficacy, quality of life, pain intensity, pain vulnerability, scale validation, factor structure
MeSH terms
Adult, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pain Measurement, Quality of Life, Time Factors, Mood Disorders, Resilience, Psychological, Chronic Pain

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