Effects of temperature on heat pain adaptation and habituation in men and women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We recently reported that women report greater pain adaptation and habituation to moderately painful heat stimuli than men (Hashmi and Davis [16]); but slightly lower temperatures were needed to evoke moderate pain in the women. Hardy et al (1962) and LaMotte (1979) suggested that pain adaptation is most prominent at modest noxious heat temperatures and may occur at temperatures close to pain thresholds. Thus, as a follow-up to our previous study, we examined the role of absolute temperature in pain adaptation and habituation in men and women and assessed whether pain threshold impacts these findings. We hypothesised that pain adaptation and habituation would be more prominent at low and moderate temperatures, and that higher temperatures would induce pain adaptation and habituation in women but not in men. We further hypothesized that pain adaptation would not be correlated with pain thresholds. To test this, we obtained continuous ratings of pain evoked by 44.5-47.5°C stimuli applied to the dorsal foot of men and women. Each run consisted of three 30s stimuli at the same temperature with a 60s inter-stimulus interval. Women showed within-stimulus adaptation of total pain at all temperatures, but men showed significant adaptation to temperatures less than 47°C. There were no sex differences in inter-stimulus habituation and both men and women reported habituation to temperatures less than 46°C. Pain thresholds did not correlate with pain adaptation. These data highlight the temperature-sensitivity and sex differences of pain adaptation and habituation.
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 | 0.002 | 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".