Effects of subcutaneous administration of glutamate on pain, sensitization and vasomotor responses in healthy men and women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study aimed to investigate if (1) subcutaneous injection of glutamate induces pain, sensitization and vasomotor responses in humans and (2) if sex differences exist in these responses. Thirty healthy volunteers (men-15 and women-15) were included. Each subject received four subcutaneous injections (0.1ml; glutamate 100, 10, 1mM and isotonic saline 0.9%) into the forehead skin in two sessions separated by one week. Assessments of pain intensity (VAS), quality, distribution; area of pinprick hyperalgesia; pressure pain threshold (PPT) at the injection site; surface skin temperature and local blood flow were performed at predetermined time points. The highest concentration of glutamate evoked the highest pain intensity, the longest duration of pain and the largest pain area under the VAS-time curve (P<0.001) in both men and women, although responses in women were larger than in men (P<0.05). The face-chart pain area was the largest for the highest concentration of glutamate (P<0.001) and women drew a larger pain area than men (P=0.024). The area of pinprick hyperalgesia was the largest for glutamate 100mM (P<0.001) and women indicated a larger area than men (P<0.001). Concentration-dependent local vasomotor responses were found following the subcutaneous injection of glutamate but there was no sex difference in this effect. Glutamate 100mM significantly reduced the PPT values (P<0.001) without sex-related differences. The present study demonstrates for the first time that subcutaneous injection of glutamate evokes pain, vasomotor responses and pinprick hyperalgesia in human volunteers and that there are sex-related differences in some of these responses.
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 | 0.001 | 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".