MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1712814198 · doi:10.3233/nre-2000-14205

Pain, cognition and traumatic brain injury

2000· article· en· W1712814198 on OpenAlexaff
Keith Nicholson

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurorehabilitation · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsToronto Western Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraumatic brain injuryCognitionPsychosocialPsychologyConcussionMedicineClinical psychologyInjury preventionPsychiatryPoison controlMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There has been considerable controversy concerning the problem of the persisting post-concussive syndrome and whether cognitive or other sequelae might be attributed to the effects of brain injury or other causes. Headache is the predominant problem in virtually all surveys of the post-concussive syndrome. It is suggested that pain and related problems may account for most of the difficulties in those presenting with the persisting post-concussive syndrome or other cases in which mild to moderate brain injury is suspected. A survey of the literature concerning the relationship of pain, cognition and traumatic brain injury indicates that cognitive difficulties are common in acute or chronic pain, with or without any indication of brain injury. However, numerous methodological problems are apparent and there is clearly need for further study. Consideration is given both to psychosocial and neurobiological effects underlying any such relationships.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.259 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations48
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurorehabilitationSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesFrench-language works237,207