An interventional study of Patient Education and ChatGPT in Chronic Low Back Pain (CLBP), sponsored by Amasya University. Not yet recruiting at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye). Open to female participants aged 18 Years to 65 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-11-04.
Sponsored by Amasya University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
The goal of this study is to learn if ChatGPT-generated answers can improve pain beliefs, catastrophizing, and self-efficacy in women with chronic low back pain compared to supervised pain education. The main questions it aims to answer are: Does ChatGPT improve pain beliefs, catastrophizing, and self-efficacy in women with chronic low back pain? Is ChatGPT as effective as supervised pain education? Participants will: complete baseline questionnaires online, attend a single 30-60 minute online session (randomly assigned to either a supervised pain education presentation or asking frequently questions about low back pain to ChatGPT)
This study aims to investigate the effects of responses provided by ChatGPT to frequently asked questions about low back pain on pain beliefs, catastrophizing, and self-efficacy in women with chronic low back pain, and to compare them with supervised patient education.
Designed as a randomized controlled trial, this research will be conducted with female participants aged 18-65 with a history of low back pain lasting longer than 3 months will be included. Eligible volunteers will be randomly allocated to either the supervised education group or the ChatGPT group. A single 30-minute session will be conducted with participants in both groups. Participants' pain beliefs will be evaluated using the Pain Beliefs Questionnaire, catastrophizing levels using the Pain Catastrophizing Scale, and self-efficacy levels using the Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire. Assessments will be administered twice: immediately before and immediately after the session.
Within the scope of this study, the impact of information obtained from ChatGPT-one of today's widely used and easily accessible AI chatbots-on chronic low back pain, will be revealed. Additionally, comparing these effects with those of supervised pain education may provide a significant contribution to health literacy regarding low back pain.
Amasya University is the lead sponsor of 81 studies on the registry; 23 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Other: Patient Education
Other: ChatGPT
Responses to frequently asked questions about low back pain will be developed within the framework of Pain Neuroscience Education, based on Butler and Moseley's (2003) book "Explain Pain" and current low back pain management guidelines. The prepared responses will be compiled into a PowerPoint presentation and delivered by one of the researchers via screen sharing on Microsoft Teams. The presentation is planned to last approximately 30-60 minutes. All participants in this group will attend the presentation conducted by the same researcher. Participants will not be allowed to ask any additional questions during the session.
Frequently asked questions about low back pain found in the literature will be sent to participants via email. During screen sharing on Microsoft Teams, participants will be asked to submit these questions one by one to an AI chatbot and carefully read the responses. The same researcher will accompany the participants while they ask all the questions to the AI tool. This process is planned to take approximately 30-60 minutes. Participants will not be allowed to ask any additional questions during the session. However, once all evaluations are completed, a PDF version of the presentation prepared by the researchers will also be shared with participants in this group.
Pain Beliefs Questionnaire
Participants' pain beliefs will be evaluated using the Pain Beliefs Questionnaire. The scale uses a 6-point Likert-type rating ranging from 0 to 5 (never, rarely, sometimes, often, almost always, and always) and consists of 12 items. Two subscale scores are obtained from the questionnaire: psychological pain belief and organic pain belief. A higher score indicates a higher pain belief related to that subscale, whereas a lower score indicates a lower pain belief. The validity and reliability study of the scale has been conducted.
Time frame: baseline
Pain Catastrophizing Scale
Participants' level of pain catastrophizing will be evaluated using the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS). The PCS is a 13-item Likert-type self-report scale. Each item is rated on a 0-4 scale. The total score ranges from 0 to 52. It comprises three subscales: rumination, magnification, and helplessness. Higher scores indicate higher levels of catastrophizing. The validity and reliability study of the scale has been conducted.
Time frame: baseline
Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire
Participants' level of pain-related self-efficacy will be evaluated using the Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ). Based on Bandura's concept of self-efficacy, the questionnaire is a 10-item self-report tool designed to measure the degree of confidence in performing a range of activities despite pain. Among questionnaires evaluating pain self-efficacy, it is a practical tool due to its brevity, possesses well-proven validity and reliability, and measures multiple domains of self-efficacy related to social and physical functioning. Each item is rated on a 7-point Likert-type scale (0: Not at all confident, 6: Completely confident). The total score ranges from 0 to 60, with higher scores indicating greater self-efficacy for functionality despite pain. The validity and reliability study of the questionnaire has been conducted.
Time frame: baseline
Pain Beliefs Questionnaire
Participants' pain beliefs will be evaluated using the Pain Beliefs Questionnaire. The scale uses a 6-point Likert-type rating ranging from 0 to 5 (never, rarely, sometimes, often, almost always, and always) and consists of 12 items. Two subscale scores are obtained from the questionnaire: psychological pain belief and organic pain belief. A higher score indicates a higher pain belief related to that subscale, whereas a lower score indicates a lower pain belief. The validity and reliability study of the scale has been conducted.
Time frame: immediately after intervention
Pain Catastrophizing Scale
Participants' level of pain catastrophizing will be evaluated using the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS). The PCS is a 13-item Likert-type self-report scale. Each item is rated on a 0-4 scale. The total score ranges from 0 to 52. It comprises three subscales: rumination, magnification, and helplessness. Higher scores indicate higher levels of catastrophizing. The validity and reliability study of the scale has been conducted.
Time frame: immediately after intervention
Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire
Participants' level of pain-related self-efficacy will be evaluated using the Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ). Based on Bandura's concept of self-efficacy, the questionnaire is a 10-item self-report tool designed to measure the degree of confidence in performing a range of activities despite pain. Among questionnaires evaluating pain self-efficacy, it is a practical tool due to its brevity, possesses well-proven validity and reliability, and measures multiple domains of self-efficacy related to social and physical functioning. Each item is rated on a 7-point Likert-type scale (0: Not at all confident, 6: Completely confident). The total score ranges from 0 to 60, with higher scores indicating greater self-efficacy for functionality despite pain. The validity and reliability study of the questionnaire has been conducted.
Time frame: immediately after intervention
Other open studies at Amasya University, Amasya
Open a list, then choose Watch this search to get new studies there in a weekly email.
Plan to share: No
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
Start is estimated for Dec 2026; primary completion for Jan 2028, 13 months later.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
From the registry record's own update history. This site started tracking changes on Sep 25, 2026; for anything earlier, see the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Oct 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Agnosia
Amasya University