Autonomic changes in fibromyalgia: Clinical and electrophysiological study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BackgroundAutonomic nervous system (ANS) dysfunction is one of the suggested pathophysiological mechanisms of fibromyalgia (FM). Its dysfunction may contribute to enhanced pain and other clinical problems associated with FM. Previous studies showed conflicting results regarding ANS function in FM. Some studies showed increased while others showed decreased ANS activity in FM patients. Thus, the autonomic responses in FM patients need further elaboration.Aim of the workThe aim of this work was to evaluate the autonomic dysfunction in FM patients clinically and electrophysiologically.Subjects and methodsTwenty-five patients (23 females and 2 males) diagnosed as FM and 15 apparently healthy individuals served as a control group were included in this study. Patients were subjected to thorough clinical examination and assessment of 1 – pain by McGill pain questionnaire (MPQ), 2 – sleep by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), 3 – depression by Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) and 4 – functional status by Fibromyalgia impact questionnaire (FIQ). Assessment of ANS function was carried out by tilt table test, measuring supine and standing blood pressure (BP) and heart rate (HR) and sympathetic skin response (SSR) of the hands.ResultsCompared to controls, there was a statistically significant decrease of standing systolic BP standing, diastolic BP and standing HR as well as a statistically significant increase in latency and decrease in amplitude of SSR of the hands of the FM patients. HRSD was correlated positively with supine systolic BP and standing diastolic BP while McGill pain questionnaire was correlated positively with supine systolic BP. Moreover, VAS falling asleep was correlated positively with standing systolic BP.ConclusionThe studied FM patients showed ANS dysfunction in the form of abnormal responses to active and passive changes in posture as well as abnormal SSR.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".