MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W153790771 · doi:10.1155/2008/754260

Central Poststroke Pain: An Abstruse Outcome

2008· review· en· W153790771 on OpenAlexafffund
James L. Henry, Chitra Lalloo, Kiran Yashpal

Bibliographic record

VenuePain Research and Management · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDysesthesiaNeuropathic painMedicineHyperalgesiaAllodyniaAnxietyStroke (engine)Pain disorderSensationAnesthesiaComplex regional pain syndromeDepression (economics)Chronic painPsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyPsychiatryNociceptionNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Central poststroke pain (CPSP), formerly known as thalamic pain syndrome of Déjerine and Roussy, is a central neuropathic pain occurring in patients affected by stroke. It is one manifestation of central pain, which is broadly defined as central neuropathic pain caused by lesions or dysfunction in the central nervous system. Thalamic pain was first described 100 years ago by Déjerine and Roussy and has been described as "among the most spectacular, distressing, and intractable of pain syndromes". CPSP is characterized by constant or intermittent pain and is associated with sensory abnormalities, particularly of thermal sensation. While the pain is frequently described as burning, scalding, or burning and freezing, other symptoms are usually vague and hard to characterize, making an early diagnosis particularly difficult. In fact, those who develop CPSP may no longer be under the care of health care professionals when their symptoms begin to manifest, resulting in misdiagnosis or a significant delay before treatment begins. Diagnosis is further complicated by cognitive and speech limitations that may occur following stroke, as well as by depression, anxiety and sleep disturbances. Patients may also exhibit spontaneous dysesthesia and the stimulus-evoked sensory disturbances of dysesthesia, allodynia and hyperalgesia. The present study offers a historical reference point for future clinical and basic research into this elusive type of debilitating pain.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.248
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.219 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations88
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePain Research and ManagementSame topicPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207