Adrenocortical and Nociceptive Responses to Opioid Blockade in Hypertension-Prone Men and Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Attenuated pain sensitivity and exaggerated adrenocortical stress reactivity have been documented in individuals at high risk for hypertension. The endogenous opioid system may play a role in these response alterations. We compared adrenocortical and nociceptive responses to opioid blockade using naltrexone in hypertension-prone men and women. METHODS: Ninety-nine participants completed two sessions during which a placebo or 50 mg naltrexone was administered using a double-blind, counterbalanced design. Participants rated their pain and completed the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ) after three assessments of the nociceptive flexion reflex and after assessment of nociceptive pain threshold and tolerance. Saliva samples were obtained throughout the sessions. RESULTS: Salivary cortisol levels increased after pain assessment after the ingestion of naltrexone, but not after placebo, with the low-risk group exhibiting an earlier peak of cortisol response. Participants reported greater pain ratings and higher MPQ scores in the naltrexone versus placebo condition, and these effects were more pronounced in women. Pain threshold and tolerance were higher among high-risk men relative to low-risk men. CONCLUSIONS: The results are consistent with the inhibitory effects of the endogenous opioids on cortisol response and suggest an altered response timeline among hypertension-prone individuals. The results demonstrate that hypoalgesia may be a marker of hypertension risk in men but not in women.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".