Cited by 205Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationPediatric Pain Management TechniquesPain Management and Treatment

Chronic pain reconsidered

Open access
Von Korff, Michael, Dunn, Kate M.·2008·Pain

Abstract

Chronic pain has been traditionally defined by pain duration, but this approach has limited empirical support and does not account for chronic pain's multi-dimensionality. This study compared duration-based and prospective approaches to defining chronic pain in terms of their ability to predict future pain course and outcomes for primary care patients with three common pain conditions: back pain (n=971), headache (n=1078), or orofacial pain (n=455). At baseline, their chronic pain was classified retrospectively based on Pain Days in the prior six months and prospectively with a prognostic Risk Score identifying patients with "possible" or "probable" chronic pain. The 0-28 Risk Score was based on pain intensity, pain-related activity limitations, depressive symptoms, number of pain sites, and Pain Days. Pain and behavioral outcomes were assessed at six-month follow-up, and long-term opioid use was assessed two to five years after baseline. Risk Score consistently predicted clinically significant pain at six months better than did Pain Days alone (area under the curve of 0.74-0.78 for Risk Score vs. 0.63-0.73 for Pain Days). Risk Score was a stronger predictor of future SF-36 Physical Function, pain-related worry, unemployment, and long-term opioid use than Pain Days alone. Thus, for these three common pain conditions, a prognostic Risk Score had better predictive validity for pain outcomes than did pain duration alone. However, chronic pain appears to be a continuum rather than a distinct class, because long-term pain outcomes are highly variable and inherently uncertain.

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.2007.12.010

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Definitions based solely on pain duration do not consider the multidimensional nature of chronic pain, namely activity limitations and participation restrictions.

    “Although conceptually appealing, this hotly debated7 approach does not consider the multidimensional nature of chronic pain, namely, the presence of activity limitations and participation restrictions,5,17,30–36 classifications recognized by the World Health Organization.37”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 41 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. [7]Derogatis LR. SCL-90-R: Administration, Scoring and Procedures Manual-II. Towson, MD: Clinical Psychometric Research; 1983. [Google Scholar]
  2. [16]Kendall NAS, Linton SJ, Main CJ. Guide to assessing psychosocial yellow flags in acute low back pain: risk factors for long-term disability and work loss. Wellington, New Zealand: Accident Rehabilitation & Compensation Insurance Corporation of New Zealand and the National Health Committee; 1997. [Google Scholar]
  3. [25]Saunders KW, Davis RL, Stergachis A. Pharmacoepidemiology. Fourth Edition. West Sussex, England: John Wiley and Sons; 2005. Group Health Cooperative. [Google Scholar]
  4. [32]Von Korff M, Miglioretti D. A prospective approach to defining chronic pain. In: Flor H, editor. Proceedings of the 11th World Congress on Pain of the International Association for the Study of Pain. IASP Press; 2006. pp. 761–769. [Google Scholar]
  5. [36]Von Korff M. Epidemiological and survey methods: assessment of chronic pain. In: Turk DC, Melzack R, editors. Handbook of Pain Assessment. Second Edition. New York: Guilford Press; 2001. [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Von Korff, M., & Dunn, K. M.
Affiliations
Keele University (GB)
Venue
Pain
Published
2008-08-31
Volume
138
Issue
2
Pages
267-276
ISSN
0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2072409292
Cited by
205
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 23 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 10
FWCI
11.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA022557)
  • National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (P01DE008773)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
Keywords
chronic pain, pain duration, prognostic risk score, back pain, headache, orofacial pain, depressive symptoms, pain-related worry, chronic opioid use, physical function, unemployment, primary care patients
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Analgesics, Chronic Disease, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pain, Pain Measurement, Surveys and Questionnaires, 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