MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sex Differences in Musculoskeletal Pain

2001· review· en· W1977788367 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Journal of Pain · 2001
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMusculoskeletal painPsychosocialPhysical therapyChronic painSex characteristicsFibromyalgiaPain catastrophizingPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Epidemiologic, clinical, and experimental evidence points to sex differences in musculoskeletal pain. Adult women more often have musculoskeletal problems than do men. Discrepant findings regarding the presence of such differences during childhood and adolescence continue. Biologic and psychosocial factors might account for these differences. The authors review evidence showing that mechanically induced pressure is more likely to show sex differences than other noxious stimuli and to discriminate between individuals suffering from musculoskeletal pain and matched controls. The authors suggest that a state of increased pain sensitivity, with a peripheral or central origin, predisposes individuals to chronic muscle pain conditions, and that there are sex differences in the operation of these mechanisms; women are vulnerable to the development and maintenance of musculoskeletal pain conditions.

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)0.034
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0340.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.348 · 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