Cited by 69Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationPediatric Pain Management TechniquesPain Management and Treatment

Long-term, non-specific spinal pain: reliable and valid subgroups of patients

Bergström, Gunnar, Bodin, Lennart, Jensen, Irene B, Linton, Steven J, Nygren, Åke L·2001·Behaviour Research and Therapy

Abstract

The aim of this study was to identify reliable and valid subgroups of spinal pain patients, using data from the Swedish version of the Multidimensional Pain Inventory (MPI-S). A second aim was to test the generalisability of the three patient profiles described in earlier studies on the MPI ("adaptive coper", "dysfunctional" and "interpersonally distressed" patients). The study base consisted of two samples of individuals suffering from long-term, non-specific spinal pain and the results were validated across these samples. Cluster analysis was used to detect distinct groups of patients and the validity of these subgroups was evaluated on variables not used to generate the cluster solution. One subgroup was characterised by lower pain severity, lower interference with everyday activities, lower affective distress and higher life control than the other two subgroups. This patient profile was similar to the MPI adaptive coper patients. A second subgroup resembled the dysfunctional patient profile, thus displaying a worse adjustment to chronic pain than the AC patients. The third patient group reported significantly lower levels of social support from "significant others" than the other subgroups. This patient profile was similar to that of the interpersonally distressed patient group. Taken together, the results support the reliability, validity and generalisability of three subgroups of chronic pain patients derived from the MPI-S.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0005-7967(99)00175-8

Cites

Statistics

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

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?

  • MPI-S is primarily used to identify patients with well-functioning or dysfunctional coping strategies developed for Swedish usage.

    “Multidimensional Pain Inventory‐Swedish version is primarily used to identify patients with well‐functioning or dysfunctional coping strategies developed for Swedish usage23, 24 based on a modified version of West Haven‐Yale Multidimensional Pain Inventory.25”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 38 · Cited by 69

Authors
Bergström, G., Bodin, L., Jensen, I. B., Linton, S. J., & Nygren, Å. L.
Affiliations
  • Karolinska Institutet (SE)
  • Örebro University Hospital (SE)
Corresponding author
Bergström, Gunnar
Venue
Behaviour Research and Therapy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2001-01
Volume
39
Issue
1
Pages
75-87
ISSN
0005-7967 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1979126700
Cited by
69
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
FWCI
1.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Behaviour Research and Therapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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 non-specific low back pain, Multidimensional Pain Inventory, patient subgroups, patient characteristics, adaptive coping, dysfunctional coping, interpersonal distress, social support, pain intensity, emotional distress, life control, clustering
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Back Pain, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pain Measurement, Psychometrics, Sick Role, Sweden, Reproducibility of Results

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