Modulation of Pain-Induced Neuromuscular Trunk Responses by Pain Expectations: A Single Group Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the alteration of pain-induced neuromuscular trunk responses by expectations in healthy volunteers. METHODS: Twenty-three asymptomatic participants performed series of flexion-extension movements in 3 different experimental conditions: innocuous heat stimulation (control) and noxious heat stimulation associated with expectations of low or high pain intensity. These stimuli were administered by a contact thermode placed over the lumbar region (L4 and L5) to assess the modulation of neuromuscular responses and kinematics during the flexion-extension task. Surface electromyography (EMG) of lumbar erector spinae at L2 and L3 and L4 and L5 as well as lumbopelvic kinematic variables were compared across conditions. RESULTS: Noxious stimulation significantly altered EMG responses but only in full trunk flexion. Interestingly, this alteration was significant only for muscles where noxious stimulation was applied (L4 and L5) and not for the other segment (L2 and L3). Conversely, expectations significantly altered EMG activity at L2 and L3 but not at the segment where noxious stimulation was applied. CONCLUSION: These results confirm previous findings and indicate that experimental pain can alter neuromuscular responses during a trunk flexion-extension task. Furthermore, this study suggests that expectations can alter some of these alterations. Future studies should determine whether neuromuscular changes induced by expectations may contribute to the transition from acute to chronic low-back 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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".