Back

Temporal relationships between distress and pain in people living with HIV

Arendse, G.; Kamerman, P.; Wadley, A.; Edwards, R. R.; Joska, J.; Parker, R.; Madden, V. J.

2026-07-17 primary care research
10.64898/2026.07.15.26358133 medRxiv
Show abstract

Objective: There is a bidirectional relationship between emotional distress and pain. However, this relationship is understudied in people with HIV in low-resource settings. This study sought to describe the temporal relationship between emotional distress and pain in people with HIV. Design: Longitudinal observational study. Methods: Participants with virally suppressed HIV, reporting either no pain or persistent pain at baseline, provided weekly remote ratings of distress, worst pain, and average pain using 0-10 visual analogue scales. Within-individual fluctuations in distress and pain were visualised over time. Group-level correlations were determined using Spearman's correlation tests. Cumulative link mixed models assessed whether distress and pain each predicted the other in the following week. Results: 72 participants provided responses over 49 weeks. The participants had a median (IQR) age of 43 (37-51) years, 63% (n=45) were unemployed and most were females (n=51;71%). Distress and pain fluctuated concurrently within individuals: distress was positively correlated with worst pain ({rho}=0.66, 95% CI= 0.60-0.72, p<0.001) and average pain ({rho}=0.70, 95% CI=0.64-0.75, p<0.001) intensity within the same week. Worst pain (OR=1.42, 95% CI=1.17-1.71, p<0.001) and average pain (OR=1.43, 95% CI=1.20-1.71, p<0.001) intensity both predicted distress in the next week. Distress predicted worst pain intensity (OR=1.25, 95% CI=1.07-1.46, p=0.023) but not average pain intensity (OR=1.19, 95% CI=1.01-1.40, p=0.152) in the next week. Conclusions: The temporal relationship between distress and worst pain intensity was bidirectional, whereas distress did not temporally predict average pain intensity. Both pain and emotional distress should receive attention from HIV research and clinical care in low-resource settings.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 7%
23.1%
2
Journal of Psychosomatic Research
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.5%
3
PLOS Global Public Health
344 papers in training set
Top 2%
10.3%
4
European Journal of Pain
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.2%
50% of probability mass above
5
Archives of Clinical and Biomedical Research
28 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
6
BMC Infectious Diseases
133 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.9%
7
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 39%
2.6%
8
BMJ Open
601 papers in training set
Top 8%
2.5%
9
Advanced Science
286 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.1%
10
AIDS
32 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.0%
11
ERJ Open Research
47 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.2%
12
PLOS Medicine
110 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.2%
13
Journal of General Internal Medicine
21 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.2%
14
JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes
24 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.2%
15
eClinicalMedicine
77 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
16
British Journal of Anaesthesia
17 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.1%
17
BMJ Open Respiratory Research
35 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.0%
18
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
45 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
19
Microbiology Spectrum
469 papers in training set
Top 10%
0.9%
20
Journal of the International AIDS Society
21 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
21
Journal of Sleep Research
36 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
22
Pilot and Feasibility Studies
14 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.9%
23
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 72%
0.9%
24
Communications Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%
25
BJGP Open
13 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.6%
26
Epidemiology
32 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.5%