Cited by 179Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationRheumatoid Arthritis Research and TherapiesPediatric Pain Management Techniques

Pain coping strategies and coping efficacy in rheumatoid arthritis: a daily process analysis

Keefe, Francis J, Affleck, Glenn, Lefebvre, John C, Starr, Kathleen, Caldwell, David S, Tennen, Howard·1997·Pain

Abstract

Data from daily diaries were used to analyze pain coping processes in rheumatoid arthritis patients. For 30 consecutive days, 53 individuals described the pain coping strategies they used that day and rated the efficacy of their coping, joint pain, and positive and negative mood. Relations among variables were examined across-persons and within-persons over time. At the across-persons level of analysis, (i) daily coping efficacy was unrelated to pain coping or pain intensity, and (ii) the more frequent daily use of a wide variety of pain coping strategies was correlated with greater pain. Within-person analyses provided unique information about the relations among coping, pain, and mood not apparent in the across-persons results. Specifically, these analyses showed that increases in daily coping efficacy were not only related to decreases in pain, but also to decreases in negative mood and increases in positive mood. Time-lagged effects of coping and coping efficacy were also found. Individuals who reported high levels of coping efficacy on one day had lower levels of pain on the subsequent day. The daily use of pain reduction efforts and relaxation strategies also contributed to an improvement in next-day pain and an enhancement of positive mood. The implications of these findings for the assessment of pain and coping in rheumatoid arthritis patients are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0304-3959(96)03246-0

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • In patients with rheumatoid arthritis, high coping efficacy on one day predicted much lower levels of pain the next day.

    “patients with rheumatoid arthritis who reported high coping efficacy on one day reported much lower levels of pain the next day.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Keefe, F. J., Affleck, G., Lefebvre, J. C., Starr, K., Caldwell, D. S., & Tennen, H.
Affiliations
  • Duke Medical Center (US)
  • University of Connecticut (US)
Corresponding author
Keefe, Francis J
Venue
Pain
Published
1997-01
Volume
69
Issue
1
Pages
35-42
ISSN
0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2018719613
Cited by
177
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 6 · 2018: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 11
FWCI
6.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5p60ar020621-19, 5r01ar035270-11)
  • National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (AR-42261, AR 35270, AR 20621, R01AR042261)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Rheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
Keywords
rheumatoid arthritis, pain coping, coping self-efficacy, joint pain, mood, positive and negative affect, relaxation techniques, analgesia, within-person variability, time-lagged effects
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Affect, Arthritis, Rheumatoid, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pain, Relaxation Therapy, 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