The influence of acute anxiety on assessment of nociceptive flexion reflex thresholds in healthy young adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The nociceptive flexion reflex (NFR) is a polysynaptic withdrawal reflex that occurs in response to painful stimulation. In human studies, NFR responsiveness has been used as a direct measure of nociception as well as an indirect measure of supraspinal modulation of nociceptive transmission. Previous studies have suggested that anxiety may influence NFR responding, and therefore it has been recommended that anxiety be reduced by familiarizing participants with assessment methodology prior to formal NFR assessment. The present study was designed to assess the influence of anxiety on NFR threshold. Using a repeated measures design, 40 men and women completed an NFR threshold assessment twice within session one, and twice again during a second session conducted 24h later. Within each assessment session, state anxiety was measured at the beginning of the session and immediately following each NFR threshold assessment. Results indicated that although anxiety increased in response to NFR threshold assessment and was positively related to subjective pain reports, anxiety was not related to observed NFR threshold levels. These findings suggest that individual differences in anxiety do not significantly affect NFR threshold level determinations under standard testing 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.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".