Is there a geographic and gender divide in Europe regarding the biopsychosocial approach to pain research? An evaluation of the 12th EFIC congress.

IF 1.5 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Scandinavian Journal of Pain Pub Date : 2023-07-25 Print Date: 2023-10-26 DOI:10.1515/sjpain-2023-0045
Meghan A Koop, Andrea C Benson, Michiel F Reneman, Gwendolyne G M Scholten-Peeters, Michel W Coppieters
{"title":"Is there a geographic and gender divide in Europe regarding the biopsychosocial approach to pain research? An evaluation of the 12th EFIC congress.","authors":"Meghan A Koop, Andrea C Benson, Michiel F Reneman, Gwendolyne G M Scholten-Peeters, Michel W Coppieters","doi":"10.1515/sjpain-2023-0045","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>All pain research combined advances the different domains of the biopsychosocial model and its interactions. However, there may be discrepancies between individual countries in their biomedical, psychological or social focus to pain research. As a proxy for this possible discrepancy, we analysed the biopsychosocial orientation of presentations at a recent major international pain conference.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The primary aim was to investigate whether there are geographical differences across Europe regarding the biopsychosocial orientation of workshop presentations at the 12th EFIC congress. The secondary aim was to investigate whether there were differences between female and male presenters regarding the biopsychosocial focus of their presentations. All available workshop abstracts were blinded and categorised by two independent reviewers as biomedical, psychosocial, biopsychosocial, or not applicable. Psychosocial and biopsychosocial were merged to non-biomedical.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 140 available abstracts, 126 abstracts could be categorised (biomedical: 51 %; non-biomedical: 49 %). Three clusters of countries emerged: (1) countries with a clear majority (≥80 %) of non-biomedical presentations (The Netherlands and Belgium); (2) countries with a balance between biomedical and non-biomedical presentations (United Kingdom, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Finland); and (3) countries with a clear majority (71-100 %) of biomedical presentations (Italy, Germany, Switzerland and France). Overall, women delivered more presentations than men (70 vs. 56 presentations), and delivered proportionally more non-biomedical presentations (57 %) whereas men delivered proportionally more biomedical presentations (61 %).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Analysis of the 12th EFIC congress revealed geographical and gender differences in biopsychosocial orientation. Whether this reflects established differences in pain research requires further investigation.</p>","PeriodicalId":47407,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Pain","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Pain","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/sjpain-2023-0045","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Print","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: All pain research combined advances the different domains of the biopsychosocial model and its interactions. However, there may be discrepancies between individual countries in their biomedical, psychological or social focus to pain research. As a proxy for this possible discrepancy, we analysed the biopsychosocial orientation of presentations at a recent major international pain conference.

Methods: The primary aim was to investigate whether there are geographical differences across Europe regarding the biopsychosocial orientation of workshop presentations at the 12th EFIC congress. The secondary aim was to investigate whether there were differences between female and male presenters regarding the biopsychosocial focus of their presentations. All available workshop abstracts were blinded and categorised by two independent reviewers as biomedical, psychosocial, biopsychosocial, or not applicable. Psychosocial and biopsychosocial were merged to non-biomedical.

Results: Of the 140 available abstracts, 126 abstracts could be categorised (biomedical: 51 %; non-biomedical: 49 %). Three clusters of countries emerged: (1) countries with a clear majority (≥80 %) of non-biomedical presentations (The Netherlands and Belgium); (2) countries with a balance between biomedical and non-biomedical presentations (United Kingdom, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Finland); and (3) countries with a clear majority (71-100 %) of biomedical presentations (Italy, Germany, Switzerland and France). Overall, women delivered more presentations than men (70 vs. 56 presentations), and delivered proportionally more non-biomedical presentations (57 %) whereas men delivered proportionally more biomedical presentations (61 %).

Conclusions: Analysis of the 12th EFIC congress revealed geographical and gender differences in biopsychosocial orientation. Whether this reflects established differences in pain research requires further investigation.

欧洲在疼痛研究的生物心理社会方法方面是否存在地理和性别差异?EFIC第12届大会评估。
目的:所有疼痛研究的结合推进了生物心理社会模型的不同领域及其相互作用。然而,各个国家对疼痛研究的生物医学、心理或社会关注可能存在差异。作为这种可能差异的代表,我们分析了最近一次大型国际疼痛会议上演讲的生物心理社会取向。方法:主要目的是调查欧洲各地在第12届EFIC大会上研讨会演讲的生物心理社会取向方面是否存在地理差异。第二个目的是调查女性和男性演讲者在演讲的生物心理社会焦点方面是否存在差异。两位独立评审员对所有可用的研讨会摘要进行了盲法分析,并将其分类为生物医学、心理社会、生物心理社会或不适用。结果:在140篇可用摘要中,126篇摘要可以分类(生物医学:51篇 %; 非生物医学:49 %). 出现了三组国家:(1)明显多数(≥80)的国家 %) 非生物医学专题介绍(荷兰和比利时);(2) 在生物医学和非生物医学专题介绍之间取得平衡的国家(联合王国、丹麦、挪威、瑞典和芬兰);和(3)明显占多数的国家(71-100 %) 生物医学专题介绍(意大利、德国、瑞士和法国)。总体而言,女性的演讲次数比男性多(70次对56次),非生物医学演讲次数也相应增加(57次 %) 而男性在生物医学方面的发言比例更高(61 %).结论:对第12届EFIC大会的分析揭示了生物心理社会取向的地理和性别差异。这是否反映了疼痛研究中的既定差异,还需要进一步调查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Scandinavian Journal of Pain
Scandinavian Journal of Pain CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
73
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信