Cited by 228Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome ResearchMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments

Coping strategies predict disability in patients with primary fibromyalgia

Martin, Michelle Y, Bradley, Laurence A, Alexander, Ronald W, Alarcón, Graciela S, Triana-Alexander, Mireya, Aaron, Leslie A, Alberts, Kristin R·1996·Pain

Abstract

We administered the Coping Strategies Questionnaire (CSQ) to 80 patients with fibromyalgia (FM) to determine the relationship between coping strategies and functional disability. A principal components factor analysis revealed two dimensions of patients' CSQ responses: Coping Attempts and Catastrophizing. Coping Attempts consists of five scales: Reinterpreting Pain, Ignoring Pain Sensations, Diverting Attention, Coping Self-Statements and Increasing Activity Level. Catastrophizing is comprised solely of the CSQ Catastrophizing scale. Both coping strategy dimensions were significantly related to patients' disability scores on the Sickness Impact Profile even after controlling for demographic and clinical variables as well as neuroticism. Coping Attempts was associated with higher levels of Physical (P < 0.05) and Total Disability (P < 0.01), and lower levels of Psychosocial Disability (P < 0.05). Catastrophizing was associated with higher levels of Total Disability (P < 0.01). These relationships suggest that investigators should attempt to identify Coping Attempts strategies that best reduce patients' psychological distress in the laboratory. It then may be possible to teach patients to use these strategies to reduce distress in their home and work environments.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0304-3959(96)03179-x

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 40 · Cited by 228

Authors
Martin, M. Y., Bradley, L. A., Alexander, R. W., Alarcón, G. S., Triana-Alexander, M., Aaron, L. A., & Alberts, K. R.
Affiliations
University of Alabama (US)
Corresponding author
Martin, Michelle Y
Venue
Pain
Published
1996-11
Volume
68
Issue
1
Pages
45-53
ISSN
0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2018064474
Cited by
228
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 12
FWCI
2.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Alabama at Birmingham
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01ar043136-10)
  • U.S. Public Health Service (5 M0100032)
  • National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (1-R01-AR-43136-01, P60 AR20164)
  • NIH Clinical Center
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Keywords
fibromyalgia, coping strategies, functional disability, catastrophizing, psychosocial disability, physical disability, Coping Strategies Questionnaire, Sickness Impact Profile, psychological distress
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Disability Evaluation, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Fibromyalgia, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Predictive Value of Tests, Surveys and Questionnaires

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