MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Comparison of Modality-Specific Somatosensory Changes During Menstruation in Dysmenorrheic and Nondysmenorrheic Women

2002· article· en· W1973842340 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Journal of Pain · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMenstrual Health and Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMenstrual cyclePhysical therapySensory thresholdThreshold of painMcGill Pain QuestionnaireQuantitative sensory testingMenstruationLuteal phaseVisual analogue scaleAnesthesiaFollicular phasePsychologyInternal medicineSensory system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to evaluate somatosensory thresholds to a multimodality stimulation regimen applied both within and outside areas of referred menstrual pain in dysmenorrheic women, over four phases of confirmed ovulatory cycles, and to compare them with thresholds in nondysmenorrheic women during menstruation. DESIGN: Twenty dysmenorrheic women with menstrual pain scoring 5.45 +/- 0.39 cm (mean +/- standard error of mean) on a visual analog scale (10 cm) participated. Fifteen nondysmenorrheic women with a menstrual pain score of 0.4 +/- 0.2 cm participated as controls. Ovulation was confirmed by an enzyme-multiplied immunoassay technique. Menstrual pain was described with the McGill Pain Questionnaire. Areas within menstrual pain referral were two abdominal sites and the midline of the low back, and the arm and thigh were the control areas. The pressure pain threshold (PPT) and pinch pain threshold were determined by a hand-held electronic pressure algometer, the heat pain threshold (HPT) by a contact thermode, and the tactile threshold with von Frey hairs. RESULTS: In dysmenorrheic women the McGill Pain Questionnaire showed a larger sensory and affective component of pain than the evaluative and miscellaneous groups. The HPT and PPT were lower in the menstrual phase than in the ovulatory, luteal, and premenstrual phases, both within and outside areas of referred menstrual pain (p <0.01), with a more pronounced decrease at the referral pain areas. The pinch pain threshold was lower in the menstrual phase than in the ovulatory phase (p <0.02), and the tactile threshold did not differ significantly across the menstrual phases or within any site. Dysmenorrheic women had a lower HPT at the control sites and a lower PPT at the abdomen, back, and control sites, than in those of nondysmenorrheic women in the menstrual phase. CONCLUSIONS: The results show reduced somatosensory pain thresholds during menstruation to heat and pressure stimulation, both within and outside areas of referred menstrual pain in dysmenorrheic women. Dysmenorrheic women showed a lower HPT at the control sites and a lower PPT at all the sites than those for nondysmenorrheic women in the menstrual phase. The altered somatosensory thresholds may be dependent on a spinal mechanism of central hyperexcitability, induced by recurrent moderate to severe menstrual 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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.289 · 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