Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 324

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 21 of the 21 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Physical and psychological factors maintain long-term predictive capacity post-whiplash injury

Sterling, Michele, Jull, Gwendolen, Kenardy, Justin·2006·Pain
DOI 10.1016/j.pain.2006.01.014
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Higher initial levels of pain and disability, older age, cold hyperalgesia, impaired sympathetic vasoconstriction and moderate post-traumatic stress symptoms have been shown to be associated with poor outcome 6 months following whiplash injury. This study prospectively investigated the predictive capacity of these variables at a long-term follow-up. Sixty-five of an initial cohort of 76 acutely injured whiplash participants were followed to 2-3 years post-accident. Motor function (ROM; kinaesthetic sense; activity of the superficial neck flexors (EMG) during cranio-cervical flexion), quantitative sensory testing (pressure, thermal pain thresholds and brachial plexus provocation test), sympathetic vasoconstrictor responses and psychological distress (GHQ-28, TSK and IES) were measured. The outcome measure was Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores. Participants with ongoing moderate/severe symptoms at 2-3 years continued to manifest decreased ROM, increased EMG during cranio-cervical flexion, sensory hypersensitivity and elevated levels of psychological distress when compared to recovered participants and those with milder symptoms. The latter two groups showed only persistent deficits in cervical muscle recruitment patterns. Higher initial NDI scores (OR 1.00-1.1), older age (OR 1.00-1.13), cold hyperalgesia (OR 1.1-1.13) and post-traumatic stress symptoms (OR 1.03-1.2) remained significant predictors of poor outcome at long-term follow-up (r2=0.56). The robustness of these physical and psychological factors suggests that their assessment in the acute stage following whiplash injury will be important.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.pain.2006.01.014

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 21 references

Cited by

See all 324

Metadata

Authors
Sterling, M., Jull, G., & Kenardy, J.
Venue
Pain
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2006-05
Volume
122
Issue
1
Pages
102-108
ISSN
0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.pain.2006.01.014
OpenAlex
W2103652120
Cited by
324
References
21
FWCI
12.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Physical and psychological factors maintain long-term predictive capacity post-whiplash injury. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.pain.2006.01.014
The paper
Sterling, M., Jull, G., & Kenardy, J. (2006). Physical and psychological factors maintain long-term predictive capacity post-whiplash injury. Pain. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2006.01.014

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.