CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 146Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationAutomotive and Human Injury BiomechanicsTraumatic Brain Injury Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 43 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The role of pain coping strategies in prognosis after whiplash injury: Passive coping predicts slowed recovery

Carroll, Linda J., Cassidy, David J., Côté, Pierre·2006·Pain
DOI 10.1016/j.pain.2006.03.012
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Pain coping strategies are associated with pain severity, psychological distress and physical functioning in populations with persistent pain. However, there is little evidence regarding the relationship between coping styles and recovery from recent musculoskeletal injuries. We performed a large, population-based prospective cohort study of traffic injuries to assess the relationship between pain coping strategies and recovery from whiplash injuries. Subjects were initially assessed within 6 weeks of the injury, with structured telephone interview follow-up at 6 weeks, and 3, 6, 9 and 12 months post-injury. Coping was measured at 6 weeks using the Pain Management Inventory and recovery was assessed at each subsequent follow-up period, using a global self-report question. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models showed that early use of passive coping strategies was independently associated with slower recovery. Depressive symptomatology (CES-D) was an effect modifier of this relationship. Without depressive symptomatology, those using high levels of passive coping recovered 37% slower than those using low levels of passive coping (HRR=0.63; 95% CI 0.44-0.91). However, in the presence of depressive symptomatology, those using high levels of passive coping recovered 75% more slowly than those who coped less passively (HRR=0.25; 95% CI 0.17-0.39). In other words, those with depressive symptoms but who used few passive coping strategies recovered four times more quickly than those with depressive symptoms who used high levels of passive coping. Active coping showed no independent association with recovery. These findings highlight the importance of early assessment of both coping behaviors and depressive symptomatology.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.pain.2006.03.012

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 40 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–146 of 146

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Carroll, L. J., Cassidy, D. J., & Côté, P.
Affiliations
  • University of Alberta (CA)
  • University Health Network (CA)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
Corresponding author
Carroll, Linda J.
ORCID
Venue
Pain
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2006-09
Volume
124
Issue
1
Pages
18-26
ISSN
0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.pain.2006.03.012
OpenAlex
W2051732837
Cited by
146
References
40
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 7
FWCI
7.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Automotive and Human Injury Biomechanics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Clinical Neurology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
Keywords
pain coping, whiplash injury, passive coping, active coping, recovery time, depressive symptoms, road traffic injuries, musculoskeletal injuries, effect modification
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adolescent, Adult, Depression, Disability Evaluation, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pain, Pain Measurement, Predictive Value of Tests, Prospective Studies, Surveys and Questionnaires, Retrospective Studies, Time Factors, Whiplash Injuries, Confounding Factors, Epidemiologic, Proportional Hazards Models, Disease Progression, Recovery of Function

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