Reported Pain and Fatigue Behaviors Mediate the Relationship Between Catastrophizing and Perceptions of Solicitousness in Patients With Chronic Fatigue
Catastrophizing is associated with negative outcomes in chronic pain and illness. The Communal Coping Model (CCM) and cognitive-behavioral (CB) formulations provide differing accounts of the function of catastrophizing in these contexts. The present study examined predictions from CCM and CB theoretical models in a sample of 116 patients with chronic fatigue to test: (1) whether patient-reported solicitous responses from significant others mediate the relationship of catastrophizing with patient-reported pain and fatigue behaviors, as predicted by the CCM, and (2) whether pain and fatigue behaviors mediate the relationship of catastrophizing with solicitous responses, consistent with a CB model. This work is a secondary data analysis that examined the strength of the indirect (i.e., mediating) effects among study variables. Consistent with CB models, pain and fatigue behaviors were associated with both catastrophizing and solicitous responses, and there was a significant indirect effect of catastrophizing on solicitous responses through pain and fatigue behaviors. Results were inconsistent with the CCM; catastrophizing was not significantly associated with solicitous responses, nor did solicitous responses mediate the relationship between catastrophizing and pain/fatigue behaviors. Findings highlight the importance of behavioral expressions of pain and fatigue in understanding the relationship of catastrophizing to solicitous responses in chronic fatigue.
This study of chronic fatigue patients tested cognitive-behavioral and communal coping models of catastrophizing, pain and fatigue behaviors, and solicitous responses by significant others. Results were more consistent with CB formulations, highlighting the importance of behavioral expressions of pain and fatigue in understanding the relationship of catastrophizing to solicitous responses.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 December 2015.
All research outputs
#21,659,248
of 34,410,798 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain
#2,066
of 3,235 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#258,752
of 443,388 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain
#26
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,410,798 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,235 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.3. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 443,388 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
