Cited by 47Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsPediatric Pain Management TechniquesMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation

Cognitive fusion and pain experience in young people

Solé, Ester, Tomé-Pires, Catarina, de la Vega, Rocío, Racine, Mélanie, Castarlenas, Elena, Jensen, Mark P., Miró, Jordi·2016·The Clinical Journal of Pain

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) has been shown to be an effective treatment for chronic pain in young people. Cognitive fusion is a key concept of ACT that is hypothesized to contribute to distress and suffering. In this study, we sought to: (1) test hypothesized associations between cognitive fusion and pain intensity, disability, and catastrophizing; and (2) examine the function of cognitive fusion as a possible mediator between catastrophizing and disability. METHODS: A community sample of 281 young people (11 to 20 y) completed measures assessing cognitive fusion, pain intensity, disability, and pain catastrophizing. RESULTS: Cognitive fusion was positively related to pain intensity (r=0.24, P<0.01), disability (r=0.32, P<0.001), and pain catastrophizing (r=0.47, P<0.001). Moreover, cognitive fusion was found to mediate the association between pain catastrophizing and disability (β=0.01, 95% confidence interval=0.002-0.024, 5000 bootstrap resamples). DISCUSSION: The findings indicate that cognitive fusion is moderately to strongly associated with pain-related outcomes, which support the need for further research to (1) better understand the relationship between cognitive fusion and adjustment to chronic pain, and (2) determine whether the benefits of treatments such as ACT are mediated, at least in part, by reductions in cognitive fusion.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/ajp.0000000000000227

Cites

52 of 52 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Solé, E., Tomé-Pires, C., de la Vega, R., Racine, M., Castarlenas, E., Jensen, M. P., & Miró, J.
Affiliations
  • Institut de Recerca Biomèdica Catalunya Sud (ES)
  • Unit for the Study and Treatment of Pain—ALGOS
  • Western University (CA)
  • University of Washington (US)
Corresponding author
  • Solé, Ester
  • Castarlenas, Elena
  • Miró, Jordi
Venue
The Clinical Journal of Pain
Published
2016-07
Volume
32
Issue
7
Pages
602-608
ISSN
0749-8047 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2333485773
Cited by
47
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3
FWCI
4.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Journal of Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Keywords
cognitive fusion, pain catastrophizing, chronic pain, youth, pain intensity, disability, acceptance and commitment therapy, mediation
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Age Factors, Child, Cognition, Disability Evaluation, Female, Humans, Male, Models, Psychological, Pain Measurement, Psychological Tests, Young Adult, Catastrophization, Pain Perception, Chronic Pain, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy

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