Increased levels of fractalkine in the trigeminal ganglion sensitize temporalis muscle nociceptors to mechanical stimulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ability to experience pain is old and shared across species.It confers an evolutionary advantage and provides a warning of harm or impending threat.As far back as Hippocrates, it was understood that the brain was key to a person experiencing pain.Fortunately, these days we now have many techniques available to explore the human central nervous system in vivo from a functional, structural and chemical perspective in both patients and healthy subjects.Relating specific neurophysiologic measures to perceptual or non-perceptual changes induced by peripheral or central sensitisation, behavioural, psychological or pharmacological mechanisms and identifying their site of action within the CNS has both value and has been a major goal for scientists, clinicians and the pharmaceutical industry.Identifying non-invasively where functional and structural plasticity, sensitisation and other amplification or attenuation processes occur along the pain neuraxis for an individual and relating these neural mechanisms to specific pain experiences, measures of pain relief, persistence of pain states, degree of injury and the subject's underlying genetics, has neuroscientific relevance and potential diagnostic value.Learning Objectives: 1. Better knowledge of the range of physiological measures available using advanced neuroimaging that give novel insights into central pain mechanisms 2. To understand the importance of the descending pain modulatory system in acute and chronic pain 3. To learn how current theories regarding how the brain generates perception can inform the pain field.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".