Sucrose-induced analgesia is related to sweet preferences in children but not adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study tested the hypothesis that the efficacy of sucrose in reducing pain during the Cold Pressor Test (CPT) was related to its hedonic value. To this aim, we determined the most preferred level of sucrose and the analgesic properties of 24% w/v sucrose during the CPT in 242, 5- to 10-year-old children and their mothers. Outcome measures included pain thresholds (the time at which discomfort was first indicated) and pain tolerance (the length of time the hand was kept in the cold water bath). Although children, as a group, preferred significantly higher sucrose concentrations than adults, there were individual differences that allowed us to group them on the basis of those who preferred sucrose concentrations below that used in the CPT (24% w/v) and those who preferred levels >or=24% w/v sucrose. Regardless of such groupings, sucrose was not an effective analgesic in adult women. Unlike adults, the more children liked sucrose, the better its efficacy as an analgesic. That is, children who preferred >or=24%w/v sucrose exhibited an increased latency to report pain and tolerated pain for significantly longer periods of time when sucrose was held in their mouths relative to water. This effect was more pronounced among normal weight when compared to overweight/at risk for overweight children. The role that dietary habits and individual differences contribute to the preferences for sweet taste and its physiological consequences in children is an important area for future research.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".