MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045864376 · doi:10.1136/bmj.329.7480.1492

<i>The Sick Dürer</i> —a Renaissance prototype pain map

2004· article· az· W2045864376 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
G D Schott

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2004
Typearticle
Languageaz
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe RenaissanceClinical PracticeMedicinePsychologyPhysical therapyHistoryArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern pain mapping was introduced in 1949, when Palmer provided outline diagrams of the human body, and the patient was "invited to mark in on the charts wherever he experiences pain." 1 Palmer's maps not only used colours for the different varieties of pain, he also used the maps to distinguish functional from organic pain.Since then, pain maps have become widely used in clinical practice, and are included in the McGill pain questionnaire.They represent an accurate, permanent, and repeatable graphic device for delineating where pain is felt, but they also have been used to provide qualitative information-including the extent to which psychological factors contribute to an individual's pain. 2 Half a millennium earlier, Albrecht Dürer (1471-1528), the illustrious German printmaker, painter, and designer, produced an intriguing pen and watercolour, half length self portrait.The Sick Dürer is small, 12 cm×11 cm, and on it Dürer wrote, "Do wo der gelb fleck is und mit dem finger drawff dewt do is mir we" (There, where the yellow spot is located, and where I point my finger, there it hurts").Why Dürer used colour remains a mystery, but it could have been added for emphasis, just as his index finger draws attention to the painful part.The picture was sent to an out of town physician whom Dürer had consulted.When it was painted is uncertain, and suggested dates range from 1509 to 1521. 3 Dürer had been unwell on several occasions during this period, but it seems most likely that the picture relates to the illness he contracted in 1520.In the spring of 1521 Dürer recorded in his diary that, during a journey to the Netherlands the previous year, he had been seriously ill: "In the third week after Easter I was seized by a hot fever, great weakness, nausea, and headache.And before, when I was in Zeeland, a strange sickness came over me, such as I have never heard of from any man, and I still have this sickness."4 His fever periodically recurred, though in the intervening periods he was reportedly in excellent health.Dürer may have had malaria, but other diagnoses have been suggestedhepatic and splenic diseases, tuberculosis, syphilis, mental illness, and even poisoning by his competitors.5 Though the illness remains unclear, and though the picture cannot be exactly dated, Dürer was undoubtedly in pain, and he mapped exactly where he felt that pain.The precise delineation, addition of colour, emphasising finger, and annotation are striking features of this Renaissance pain map.It took five centuries until modern pain maps, some showing not dissimilar features, were introduced-or, as this picture suggests, were re-introduced.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.007

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207