Experimental pain perception remains equally active over all sleep stages
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The literature on sensory perception during sleep suggests that light sleep (Stage 2) is more responsive to external sensory stimulation (e.g. sound, electrical shock) than deep sleep (Stages 3 and 4) and REM sleep. The main objective of this study was to characterize the specificity of nociceptive stimulation to trigger sleep arousal-awakening over all sleep stages. Thirteen healthy adults (e.g. without pain or sleep problems; six female and seven male of a mean age of 24.2+/-1.3 years) were included in the study. The responses to noxious intramuscular 5% hypertonic infusion were compared to innocuous vibrotactile and to respective control stimulations: isotonic infusion and auditory stimulations. These stimulations were applied during wakefulness and were repeated during sleep. Polygraphic signals (e.g. brain activity, heart rate) signals were recorded to score sleep arousal over all sleep stages. A subjective assessment of sleep quality was made on next morning. No overnight sensitization or habituation occurred with any of the experimental stimulations. The vibratory-auditory stimulations and the noxious hypertonic infusions triggered significantly (P < 0.05) more awakenings in sleep Stage 2 and in REM than their respective control stimulations. In sleep Stage 2, both vibratory + auditory stimulations and the noxious hypertonic infusions has the same awakening response frequency (approximately 30%), however, with the noxious infusions the response frequency were similar in sleep Stages 3 and 4 (P < 0.05) and in REM (trend). Compared to the baseline night, sleep quality was lower following the night with noxious stimulation (90.1+/-2.7 and 73.3+/-7.4 mm, respectively; P < 0.03. These data suggest that pain during sleep could trigger a sleep awaking response over all sleep stages and not only in light sleep.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".