ArticlePloS one2026
Social determinants of pain, distress, and quality of life in injured workers: A cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis of patient-reported outcomes.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesPrognostic tools are widely used to guide early management of musculoskeletal (MSK) injuries. However, social identity factors such as age, gender, race, and socioeconomic status may influence symptom experience and reporting, potentially affecting the accuracy of risk classification. The purpose of this study is to identify those social identity variables associated with scores on common prognostic tools or their prognostic accuracy.
methodsWe analyzed data from a cohort of workers (n = 203) with acute musculoskeletal injuries. Participants completed the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), Traumatic Injuries Distress Scale (TIDS), EuroQoL (EQ5D-5L), and a demographic survey including age, sex, race, income, education, and perceived discrimination. Differences in baseline scores were assessed between identity groups. Recovery was dichotomized (fully recovered/not fully recovered) using 3 different recovery indicators. Predictive accuracy for recovery was evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, sample-wide and when stratified by social identity variables.
resultsOlder participants reported significantly higher pain (5.5 vs. 4.3/10, p < 0.01) and those indicating more experiences of discrimination rated higher post-trauma distress (11.1 vs. 9.2/24, p < 0.05). 8-week recovery rates were 21.7% to 54.7%. Lower education predicted <full recovery in administrative data only. The TIDS and EQ5D-5L were significantly better at predicting recovery compared to the NPRS. When disaggregated by social identity, the TIDS functioned significantly better in females than males, while the EQ5D-5L functioned similarly across all social categories.
conclusionThe results indicate that different risk/prognosis cut-scores, and even different tools, may be required for people with different intersectional identities. The results should be interpreted in light of some identities being reduced to broad categories. Most risk/prognosis tools in MSK recovery research use a single universal cut-score to distinguish low from high risk, but this study only partially supports that approach.
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.