MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W20096186 · doi:10.1155/2003/236718

Methadone in the Treatment of Neuropathic Pain

2003· article· en· W20096186 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

VenuePain Research and Management · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Management and Opioid Use
Canadian institutionsMontreal General HospitalMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuropathic painMethadoneMedicineAnesthesiaVisual analogue scaleAllodyniaNeuralgiaHyperalgesiaInternal medicineNociceptionReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Methadone, being an N-Methyl-D-Aspartate receptor antagonist, may have a potential role in the treatment of neuropathic pain. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of methadone in the treatment of neuropathic pain and to estimate the possible dose ranges needed for pain control. METHODS: Methadone was offered as a treatment option to consecutive cancer and noncancer patients with neuropathic pain. Pain intensity was measured by the visual analogue scale (VAS) (0-10 cm where 0 = no pain and 10 = worst possible pain). Mechanical allodynia and paroxysmal (shooting) pain were assessed clinically. All assessments were collected prospectively before treatment and once a stable dose of methadone was reached. RESULTS: A total number of 18 patients met our inclusion criteria. The mean pretreatment VAS +/- SD was 7.7+/-1.5 cm and this dropped significantly to 1.4+/-1.7 cm on a stable dose of methadone (P<0.0001). Nine of 13 patients (70 %) had a complete resolution of mechanical allodynia and all eight patients (100%) with shooting pain reported a complete response. The median stable dose of methadone was 15 mg per day. CONCLUSION: Methadone at relatively low doses seems to be useful in the treatment of neuropathic 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.

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)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.842
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.283 · 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