Cardiovascular influences on conditioned pain modulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conditioned pain modulation (CPM) (ie, diffuse noxious inhibitory controls) is characterized by reduced perception of pain caused by intense pain in a remote body area. The conditioning stimuli used to trigger CPM causes pain, but also important cardiovascular responses. Higher blood pressure has been associated with reduced pain sensitivity. Descending pain inhibitory mechanisms such as CPM could be involved in this relationship. We investigated the associations between CPM and cardiovascular responses during the cold-pressor test (CPT). Heat pain threshold and tolerance were evaluated in 26 (13 men, 13 women) healthy subjects. CPM was evaluated by comparing pain intensity produced by a 120-second heat stimulation before and after a CPT (5 minutes, 7°C). Heart rate, blood pressure, and baroreflex sensitivity were monitored at rest and during CPT to evaluate cardiovascular responses. We observed a positive relationship between resting blood pressure and heat pain tolerance. The CPT caused important heart rate and blood pressure increases. CPT also reduced pain intensity during the subsequent heat pain-stimulus, indicating effective CPM. A significant positive association was observed between CPM magnitude and the increase in blood pressure during the CPT. These results show that resting blood pressure values are related to acute pain tolerance, while descending pain inhibition is associated with increases in blood pressure. The rise in blood pressure caused by the conditioning stimulus is an important factor predicting the extent of endogenous pain inhibition in healthy subjects.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".