ArticleThe journal of pain2017
Linguistic Indicators of Pain Catastrophizing in Patients With Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain.
Article in The journal of pain, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Social Relationships and Experimental Pain Sensitivity in Healthy Adolescent Girls: An Exploratory Preliminary Study.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2026Observational
- Chronic musculoskeletal pain, catastrophizing, and physical function in adult women were improved after 3-month aerobic-resistance circuit training.Scientific reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The present study examined markers of pain catastrophizing in the word use of patients with chronic pain. Patients (N = 71) completed the Pain Catastrophizing Scale and wrote about their life with pain. Quantitative word count analysis examined whether the essays contained linguistic indicators of catastrophizing. Bivariate correlations showed that catastrophizing was associated with greater use of first person singular pronouns, such as "I" (r = .27, P ≤ .05) and pronouns referencing other people (r = .28, P ≤ .05). Catastrophizing was further significantly associated with greater use of sadness (r = .35, P ≤ .01) and anger (r = .30, P ≤ .05) words. No significant relationships with positive emotion and cognitive process words were evident. Controlling for patients' engagement in the writing task, gender, age, pain intensity, and neuroticism in multiple regression, the linguistic categories together uniquely explained 13.6% of the variance in catastrophizing (P ≤ .001). First person singular pronouns (β = .24, P ≤ .05) and words relating to sadness (β = .25, P ≤ .05) were significant, and pronouns referencing other people (β = .19, P ≤ .10) were trending. The results suggest that pain catastrophizing is associated with a "linguistic fingerprint" that can be discerned from patients' natural word use. PERSPECTIVE: Quantitative word count analysis examined whether pain catastrophizing is reflected in patients' written essays about living with pain. Catastrophizing was associated with more first person singular pronouns, more pronouns referencing other people, and more expressions of sadness and anger. The results can help understand how catastrophizing translates into communicative behaviors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.