Cited by 962Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationPediatric Pain Management TechniquesPsychometric Methodologies and Testing

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Pain Catastrophizing Scale: Further Psychometric Evaluation with Adult Samples

Abstract

Previous studies with undergraduates have provided support for the reliability and oblique three-factor structure of a new scale, the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS). We examined the reliability and validity of the PCS in adult community and pain outpatient samples. The PCS showed a high internal consistency in both groups. Using data from the community sample, confirmatory factor analyses showed that the PCS taps a single construct characterized by three related dimensions. Gender differences were obtained on the PCS total score in the community and the outpatient samples. The analyses also showed significant differences between the community and the outpatient samples on the PCS total and subscales. Overall, the results showed strong evidence of criterion-related, concurrent, and discriminant validity for the PCS in the community sample. Limitations of the present study are discussed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1023/a:1005548801037

Cites

29 of 29 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 30 references

1 of the 30 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Bentler, P. M., and Wu, E. J. C. (1997). EQS Structural Equations Program, Version 5.6, Multivariate Software, Encino, CA.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 962

Metadata

Authors
Osman, A., Barrios, F. X., Gutierrez, P. M., Kopper, B. A., Merrifield, T., & Grittmann, L.
Affiliations
  • University of Northern Iowa (US)
  • Northern Illinois University (US)
Corresponding author
Osman, Augustine
Venue
Journal of Behavioral Medicine
Published
2000-08
Volume
23
Issue
4
Pages
351-365
ISSN
  • 0160-7715 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-3521
OpenAlex
W143360667
Cited by
944
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 60 · 2024: 55 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 61 · 2021: 69 · 2020: 76 · 2019: 60 · 2018: 54 · 2017: 46 · 2016: 57 · 2015: 44 · 2014: 47 · 2013: 43 · 2012: 47
FWCI
1.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Behavioral Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UNI ScholarWorks (University of Northern Iowa) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Keywords
Pain Catastrophizing Scale, pain catastrophizing, psychometric validation, scale reliability, factor structure, gender differences, community-dwelling adults, criterion validity, discriminant validity
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Female, Gender Identity, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pain, Pain Measurement, Personality Inventory, Psychometrics, Sick Role, 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