ArticlePloS one2024
Biobehavior Life Regulation (BLR) scale for living well in chronic pain: Preliminary scale development and validation.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Currently available pain assessment scales focus on pain-related symptoms and limitations imposed by pain. Validated assessment tools that measure how pain is regulated by those who live well with pain are missing. This study seeks to fill this gap by describing the development and preliminary validation of the Biobehavior Life Regulation (BLR) scale. The BLR scale assesses engagement, social relatedness, and self-growth in the presence of chronic pain and the unpredictability of chronic pain. Sources for items included survivor strategies, patient experiences, existing scales, and unpredictable pain research. Review for suitability yielded 52 items. Validation measures were identified for engagement, social relatedness, self-growth, and unpredictability of pain. The study sample (n = 202) represented patients treated in the Phoenix VA Health Care System (n = 112) and two community clinics (n = 90). Demographic characteristics included average age of 52.5, heterogeneous in ethnicity and race at the VA, mainly Non-Hispanic White at the community clinics, 14 years of education, and pain duration of 18 years for the VA and 15.4 years for community clinics. Exploratory factor analysis using Oblimin rotation in the VA sample (n = 112) yielded a two-factor solution that accounted for 48.23% of the total variance. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) in the same sample showed high correlations among items in Factor 1, indicating redundancy and the need to further reduce items. The final CFA indicated a 2-factor solution with adequate fit to the data. The 2-factor CFA was replicated in Sample 2 from the community clinics (n = 90) with similarly adequate fit to the data. Factor 1, Pain Regulation, covered 8 items of engagement, social relatedness, and self-growth while Factor 2, Pain Unpredictability, covered 6 items related to the experience of unpredictable pain. Construct validity showed moderate to higher Pearson correlations between BLR subscales and relevant well-established constructs that were consistent across VA and community samples. The BLR scale assesses adaptive regulation strategies in unpredictable pain as a potential tool for evaluating regulation resources and pain unpredictability.
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.