MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964899388 · doi:10.1016/s0304-3959(02)00007-6

Cognitive modulation of pain: how do attention and emotion influence pain processing?

2002· review· en· W1964899388 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Chantal Villemure, Catherine M. Bushnell

Bibliographic record

VenuePain · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Sedative Agents
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPromMcGill Pain QuestionnaireCognitionPsychologyUnit (ring theory)MedicineAnesthesiaAudiologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anesthesia Research Unit and Faculty of Dentistry, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada *Corresponding author. McGill University, Anesthesia Research Unit, 3655 Prom. Sir William Osler, Room 1220, Montreal, Quebec H3G 1Y6. Tel.: +1-514-398-3493; fax: +1-514-398-8241 E-mail: [email protected] Submitted December 19, 2001; accepted December 20, 2001.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations710
Published2002
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePainSame topicAnesthesia and Sedative AgentsFrench-language works237,207