Repetition-induced activity-related summation of pain in patients with fibromyalgia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study compared individuals with fibromyalgia (FM) and individuals with chronic low back pain (CLBP) on repetition-induced summation of activity-related pain (RISP). Fear of movement, pain catastrophizing and depression were examined as potential mediators of group differences. The sample consisted of 50 women with FM and 50 women with CLBP who were matched on age, pain severity and pain duration. Participants were asked to lift a series of 18 weighted canisters. In one trial, participants were asked to rate their pain after each lift. In a second trial, participants estimated the weight of each of the canisters. An index of repetition-induced summation of pain was derived as the change in pain ratings across repeated lifts. Analyses revealed that women with FM obtained higher scores on the index of RISP than women with CLBP. The heightened sensitivity to RISP in individuals with FM was not due to generalized hyperalgesia or a greater work output. Consistent with previous research, fear of movement was positively correlated with RISP. Pain disability was also associated with greater RISP, but not pain catastrophizing or depression. Discussion addresses the processes by which individuals with FM might have increased RISP responses. The findings of this study point to possible neurophysiological mechanisms that could help explain the high levels of pain-related disability seen in individuals with FM. Patients with fibromyalgia showed greater activity-related summation of pain than patients with chronic low back 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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".