1,720,962 research outputs found
The impact of fear of attacks on pain‐related disability in cluster headache: Insights from the fear avoidance model
No full textAbstract Objective This study utilized the theoretical framework of the “fear avoidance model” (FAM) and investigated the role of fear of attack in pain‐related disability. To this end, a measurement specific to cluster headache (CH) was used to investigate whether fear of attacks, alongside attack frequency, is a significant predictor of pain‐related disability in CH. Background Cluster headache substantially impacts daily functioning, yet empirical research exploring specific contributing factors is limited. Methods A cross‐sectional online survey was undertaken in patients with CH, gathering sociodemographic, clinical data, and responses on the Cluster Headache Scale and the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale. Results Analysis of data from 640 patients (chronic CH: 287/640 [44.8%]; female: 264/640 [41.3%]; male: 373/640 [58.3%]; gender diverse: three of 640 [0.5%]; age range: 18–86 years; mean [standard deviation] Cluster Headache Scales subscale disability score: 36.9 [9.8]; out of 869 respondents) revealed that both attack frequency and fear of attacks significantly predicted pain‐related disability ( p < 0.001, percentage of variance explained: R 2 = 0.24). More variance was explained by fear of attacks ( R 2 = 0.22) than by attack frequency ( R 2 = 0.02). This relationship remained significant even when controlling for depression and anxiety, which were also identified as independent predictors of pain‐related disability ( p < 0.001, R 2 = 0.44). Conclusion This study emphasizes the relevance of psychological factors in CH‐related disability. Fear of attacks was found to be an independent predictor, while attack frequency was of minor relevance. Empirical investigation of the FAM in CH could improve the understanding of the mechanisms underlying disability and contribute to the development of CH‐specific interventions.Plain language Summary In this study, we wanted to find out what makes cluster headache so disabling. We found that fear of cluster headache attacks plays an important role. Further research into psychological factors in cluster headache could help develop further interventions to reduce the burden on patients.Universität Duisburg-Essen https://doi.org/10.13039/50110000834
Identifying cognitive‐affective mechanisms underlying disability in episodic migraine: Using the fear avoidance model to examine interactions
No full textAbstract Objective Using the fear‐avoidance model (FAM) as a theoretical framework, this study examined the interactions between empirical factors contributing to disability in episodic migraine. It was tested whether pain catastrophizing, fear of attacks, and depressiveness mediate the relationship between pain experience and disability. Background Migraine is a prevalent primary headache disorder associated with significant impairment in daily life. Biological and psychosocial factors contribute to its impact; however, a comprehensive model explaining the mechanisms underlying migraine‐related disability is still lacking. Methods A cross‐sectional online survey was conducted between October 2023 and March 2024 to collect sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of patients with episodic migraine. To evaluate the proposed links within the FAM, two confirmatory path analyses were performed. In Model 1, the Pain Disability Index was used to quantitatively measure subjective aspects of disability. In Model 2, the Migraine Disability Assessment questionnaire was used to assess quantitative aspects of disability. Mediators derived from the FAM included: pain experience (attack frequency and pain intensity), dysfunctional cognitive pain processing (pain catastrophizing), and dysfunctional cognitive‐affective response to pain (fear of attacks and depressiveness). Results Both path analyses demonstrated good model fit. The explained variance of migraine‐related disability was 28% (adjusted R 2 = 0.28) in both models, indicating large effect sizes. Attack frequency (standardized path coefficient [β] = 0.21, p < 0.001; β = 0.45, p < 0.001), pain intensity (β = 0.27, p < 0.001; β = 0.16, p < 0.001), fear of attacks (β = 0.12, p = 0.006; β = 0.13, p = 0.004), and depressiveness (β = 0.34, p < 0.001; β = 0.12, p = 0.006), were identified as independent predictors of disability in both models (Model 1; Model 2). Consistent with the hypothesis, an indirect pathway from attack frequency and pain intensity to disability via pain catastrophizing, fear of attacks, and depressiveness was observed in both models. Conclusion This study emphasizes the important role of (potentially modifiable) dysfunctional cognitive pain processing and provides empirical evidence for the theoretical assumptions of the FAM. Attack frequency, pain intensity, fear of attacks, and depressiveness were found to be independent predictors of subjectively and quantitatively measured disability in episodic migraine. Pain catastrophizing was identified to be a crucial cognitive‐affective factor mediating the relationship between pain experience and disability.Plain Language Summary Migraine is a common condition that can affect daily life, even between attacks. However, it is unclear which mechanisms lead to this impairment, and a comprehensive explanatory model is lacking. This study found that pain catastrophizing, a way of thinking where people expect the worst and feel helpless about pain, as well as fear of attacks and depressiveness, may be important mediators between the pain experience and disability.Abstract Objective Using the fear‐avoidance model (FAM) as a theoretical framework, this study examined the interactions between empirical factors contributing to disability in episodic migraine. It was tested whether pain catastrophizing, fear of attacks, and depressiveness mediate the relationship between pain experience and disability. Background Migraine is a prevalent primary headache disorder associated with significant impairment in daily life. Biological and psychosocial factors contribute to its impact; however, a comprehensive model explaining the mechanisms underlying migraine‐related disability is still lacking. Methods A cross‐sectional online survey was conducted between October 2023 and March 2024 to collect sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of patients with episodic migraine. To evaluate the proposed links within the FAM, two confirmatory path analyses were performed. In Model 1, the Pain Disability Index was used to quantitatively measure subjective aspects of disability. In Model 2, the Migraine Disability Assessment questionnaire was used to assess quantitative aspects of disability. Mediators derived from the FAM included: pain experience (attack frequency and pain intensity), dysfunctional cognitive pain processing (pain catastrophizing), and dysfunctional cognitive‐affective response to pain (fear of attacks and depressiveness). Results Both path analyses demonstrated good model fit. The explained variance of migraine‐related disability was 28% (adjusted R 2 = 0.28) in both models, indicating large effect sizes. Attack frequency (standardized path coefficient [β] = 0.21, p < 0.001; β = 0.45, p < 0.001), pain intensity (β = 0.27, p < 0.001; β = 0.16, p < 0.001), fear of attacks (β = 0.12, p = 0.006; β = 0.13, p = 0.004), and depressiveness (β = 0.34, p < 0.001; β = 0.12, p = 0.006), were identified as independent predictors of disability in both models (Model 1; Model 2). Consistent with the hypothesis, an indirect pathway from attack frequency and pain intensity to disability via pain catastrophizing, fear of attacks, and depressiveness was observed in both models. Conclusion This study emphasizes the important role of (potentially modifiable) dysfunctional cognitive pain processing and provides empirical evidence for the theoretical assumptions of the FAM. Attack frequency, pain intensity, fear of attacks, and depressiveness were found to be independent predictors of subjectively and quantitatively measured disability in episodic migraine. Pain catastrophizing was identified to be a crucial cognitive‐affective factor mediating the relationship between pain experience and disability.Plain Language Summary Migraine is a common condition that can affect daily life, even between attacks. However, it is unclear which mechanisms lead to this impairment, and a comprehensive explanatory model is lacking. This study found that pain catastrophizing, a way of thinking where people expect the worst and feel helpless about pain, as well as fear of attacks and depressiveness, may be important mediators between the pain experience and disability
Longitudinally persisting KCNA2-autoantibodies in mild amnestic dementia with Alzheimer´s pathology – Report and literature review
No full textPsychological transdiagnostic factors and migraine characteristics as predictors of migraine-related disability
No full textAbstract Background Migraine is a prevalent primary headache disorder that significantly impairs daily life. Research on factors contributing to migraine-related disability remains limited, particularly from a biopsychosocial perspective. This study investigated whether transdiagnostic psychological factors, as proposed by the Fear Avoidance Model (FAM), contribute to migraine-related disability beyond migraine symptoms. Methods In this cross-sectional analysis of selected baseline data from an ongoing randomized controlled trial, data from N = 158 individuals with migraine reporting ≥ 4 migraine days per month were examined. Data was collected through an online survey, including sociodemographic and clinical characteristics as well as responses to standardized questionnaires (DASS, PCS, FAMI, HIT-6). A hierarchical multiple linear regression analysis was conducted, including independent variables in two blocks: (1) sociodemographic factors and migraine symptoms, and (2) FAM factors (pain catastrophizing, fear of attacks, depressiveness). Disability, the dependent variable, was assessed using the HIT-6 questionnaire. Additionally, mediation analyses were conducted to investigate the potential mediating role of pain catastrophizing in the relationship between pain intensity or attack frequency and disability. Results A total of N = 158 participants were included in the analysis. Hierarchical regression analysis showed that sociodemographic and migraine symptoms accounted for 49% of the variance in disability ( R² adj = 0.49, p < 0.001). The inclusion of FAM factors significantly increased the explained variance to 62% ( R² adj = 0.62, p < 0.001; ΔR² adj = 0.13, p < 0.001), indicative of a high goodness-of-fit. Independent predictors included gender (ß = -0.15, p = 0.007), age (ß = 0.11, p = 0.029), maximum pain intensity (ß = 0.46, p < 0.001), pain catastrophizing (ß = 0.26, p < 0.001), and depressiveness (ß = 0.13, p = 0.047). Mediation analyses revealed that pain catastrophizing ( ß = 0.35, p < 0.001) mediated the relationship between pain intensity ( ß = 0.47, p < 0.001) and disability ( R² = 0.62, p < 0.001), whereas no mediation effect was observed for attack frequency as independent variable (X→Y: ß = -0.05, p = 0.44; X→ M: ß = -0.07, p = 0.26; M → Y: ß = 0.51, p < 0.001). Conclusion The findings underscore the significant role of transdiagnostic psychological factors in migraine-related disability beyond migraine and sociodemographic characteristics. Pain catastrophizing emerged as an important mediator between pain experience and disability, which is in line with the assumptions of the FAM. Trial registration German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS), DRKS-ID: DRKS00033893
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
- …
