CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 127Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationPediatric Pain Management TechniquesPain Management and Opioid Use

The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year.

The Coping Strategies Questionnaire and Chronic Pain Adjustment: A Conceptual and Empirical Reanalysis

Geisser, Michael E., Robinson, Michael E., Henson, Connie D.·1994·The Clinical Journal of Pain
DOI 10.1097/00002508-199406000-00003
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objective Some studies have found significant relations between both the factor scores and subscales of the Coping Strategies Questionnaire (CSQ) and various measures of adjustment to chronic pain. In their review of the literature on coping with chronic pain, Jensen et al. (Pain 1991;47:249-83) suggest that conceptual overlap between the subscales may inflate these observed correlations. In the present study, we examine the factor structure of the CSQ subscales which reflect coping, excluding the CSQ subscales which measure appraisal or activity. We then examine the relationship between the CSQ factors and subscales and pain adjustment, while controlling for selected variables. Design and subjects One hundred fifty-two chronic pain patients were administered the CSQ. Seventy-three were also administered the Multidimensional Pain Inventory (MPI). Adjustment to chronic pain was defined based on patients' cluster membership on the MPI and responses to the Interference, Pain Severity, and Negative Affect subscales. Setting Tertiary care center. Results Multiple regression analyses revealed that the Pain Avoidance factor was positively related to pain severity, interference, and MPI cluster membership. In addition, the catastrophizing subscale was positively related to negative affect and MPI cluster membership even when controlling for level of depression, ability to decrease pain was related to lower levels of pain severity, and ability to control pain was related to MPI cluste…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00002508-199406000-00003

Cites

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

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–127 of 127

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Geisser, M. E., Robinson, M. E., & Henson, C. D.
Affiliations
University of Florida Health (US)
ORCID
Venue
The Clinical Journal of Pain
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
1994-06
Volume
10
Issue
2
Pages
98-106
ISSN
0749-8047 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1097/00002508-199406000-00003
OpenAlex
W2078331019
Cited by
127
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 7
FWCI
3.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Journal of Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
Keywords
Coping Strategies Questionnaire, chronic pain, pain avoidance, catastrophizing, pain intensity, pain interference, negative affect, pain management, coping strategies, factor structure, Multidimensional Pain Inventory, depression
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Aged, Chronic Disease, Depression, Evaluation Studies as Topic, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pain, Surveys and Questionnaires, Regression Analysis, Severity of Illness Index

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