Impact de la douleur chronique sur la cognition et facteurs psychologiques concomitants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article de synthese a pour objectif de faire etat des connaissances actuelles sur l’impact de la douleur chronique (DC) sur le fonctionnement cognitif/neuropsychologique, en portant une attention particuliere aux facteurs psychologiques concomitants. Une premiere section de l’article discute du fonctionnement neuropsychologique de patients presentant de la DC sans etiologie particuliere, tandis qu’une deuxieme section porte sur le fonctionnement neuropsychologique de patients souffrant de fibromyalgie. Les etudes existantes permettent d’identifier des deficits de l’attention, de la memoire et des fonctions executives dans les deux groupes. Les resultats suggerent que les deficits de l’attention sont particulierement associes a la douleur d’intensite elevee. Les symptomes d’anxiete et de depression, la propension a la catastrophisation et l’autoperception hypervigilante s’associent aux difficultes cognitives chez les douloureux chroniques, sans toutefois que leur presence soit necessaire pour qu’il y ait impact sur la cognition. Les recherches nous fournissent des preuves que l’association entre la douleur d’intensite elevee, certains facteurs psychologiques/emotifs et les troubles de la cognition identifies pourrait etre liee aux changements neuropathologiques qui s’operent chez les douloureux chroniques. Les implications pour l’evaluation neuropsychologique sont discutees.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".