Cited by 57Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationWorkplace Health and Well-beingMedical Practices and Rehabilitation

Working despite pain: Factors associated with work attendance versus dysfunction

Linton, Steven J., Buer, Nina·1995·International Journal of Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

A cross-sectional investigation of psychosocial variables in 63 female employees matched for experienced pain was conducted to study the difference between back pain sufferers who were working (Copers) and those who were off work (Dysfunctional). The subjects reported moderate to severe pain often or always during the past year and were employed at the same hospital. Thirty-seven women who had not been off work for pain made up the Copers group, whereas 26 women who had been off work for their pain made up the Dysfunctional group. Subjects were interviewed and completed a battery of questionnaires designed to penetrate level of dysfunction, perceived health, work and social satisfaction, perceived workload, coping strategies, and pain beliefs. Multiple covariate analyses that controlled for perceived workload, smoking, low-back mobility, and obesity revealed significant differences between the groups on levels of functioning, pain beliefs, and coping strategies used. Dysfunctional subjects had stronger beliefs that pain was directly related to activities that they had little control over their pain, that their health was poor, and that they tended to focus more on their pain. A discriminant analysis correctly classified 83% of the subjects as to work status based on six psychosocial variables. These results not only demonstrate the importance of psychosocial factors in back pain, but underscore the fact that work absence for back pain may he controlled by psychological factors related to beliefs and coping strategies. Future research may attempt to use these factors in the screening of patients.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1207/s15327558ijbm0203_4

Cites

22 of 22 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

1 of the 23 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Linton, S. J., & Buer, N.
Affiliations
Örebro University Hospital (SE)
Venue
International Journal of Behavioral Medicine
Published
1995-09
Volume
2
Issue
3
Pages
252-262
ISSN
  • 1070-5503 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7558
OpenAlex
W1977094935
Cited by
57
References
23
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
0.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Behavioral Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Workplace Health and Well-being
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
Keywords
low back pain, employee attendance, absenteeism, pain beliefs, coping strategies, psychosocial factors, women employees, perceived workload, health perception, pain catastrophizing, occupational health

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