2018
DOI: 10.1037/pas0000467
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Construct validity of the G-CPAQ and its mediating role in pain interference and adjustment.

Abstract: The Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire (CPAQ) is a measure of pain acceptance comprised of pain willingness (PW) and activity engagement (AE; McCracken et al., 2004). Concerns about the factorial structure of the CPAQ exist, as it is not yet clear whether PW and AE constitute 2 independent constructs or 1, pain acceptance. Concerns also exist about the internal and predictive validity of test score interpretations of this measure. This study also presents that the choice of predictor variables has contribut… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

4
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 53 publications
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…12,13 This study's findings on long-term disability and quality of life gains lend support to the theoretical framework of ACT and ACT for pain approach particularly, in that symptom changes may not be needed in order for a person to live a functional and valued life. 67,72,76,78 Importantly, on average 63.74% of ACT group participants showed significant reliable improvements across primary outcomes at 3 months, with the number reaching 70.72% improvement by the 6-month follow-up. Additionally, more than half maintained their effects at 12-month follow-up.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 91%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…12,13 This study's findings on long-term disability and quality of life gains lend support to the theoretical framework of ACT and ACT for pain approach particularly, in that symptom changes may not be needed in order for a person to live a functional and valued life. 67,72,76,78 Importantly, on average 63.74% of ACT group participants showed significant reliable improvements across primary outcomes at 3 months, with the number reaching 70.72% improvement by the 6-month follow-up. Additionally, more than half maintained their effects at 12-month follow-up.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…Patients with primary headaches were recruited through private-care Neurologists across Cyprus, e-mails, newsletter adverts, and fliers distributed at targeted locations (eg, municipalities, libraries, and clinics' waiting-rooms), articles published in local newspapers, and referrals from our previously conducted studies. 37,76,77 Selection criteria included: 1) meeting diagnostic criteria for Primary Headache based on the International Classification of Headache Disorders-II-ICHD-II 30 ; 2) older than 18 years; 3) sufficient Greek reading ability; and 4) stable pharmacotherapy and headache experience (both remained unchanged for 4 weeks prior to assessment).…”
Section: Participants Recruitment Inclusion and Exclusion Criteriamentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This is an 11-item self-report assessment of pain acceptance, rated on a 7-point Likert scale, with higher scores indicating greater pain acceptance (theoretical range from 0 to 66). The previous literature has shown good psychometric indicators of CPAQ, with Cronbach’s alphas between .80 and .86 (Ojala et al, 2013; Vasiliou et al, 2018). The Spanish version has shown adequate test–retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient .83), internal consistency (Cronbach’s α: .83), and construct validity (Rodero et al, 2010).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…However, these two processes are very highly correlated and essentially indistinguishable. According to more recent theoretical and empirical accounts of the ACT, theoretical model may come to support the idea that the two concepts of EA and CF are interlinked and constitute one principle of an “Open” response style (Harris, 2009; Hayes, Villatte, Levin, & Hildebrandt, 2011; Vasiliou, Karekla, Michaelides, & Kasinopoulos, 2018).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%