Increased Analgesia to Thermal Stimuli in Rats after Brief Exposures to Complex Pulsed 1 Microtesla Magnetic Fields
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nociceptive thresholds to a 55 degrees C hot surface were measured for female Wistar rats before treatments and 30 min. and 60 min. after the treatments. After injection with either naloxone or saline following baseline measurements, the rats were exposed for 30 min. to either sham fields or to weak (about 1 microTesla) burst-firing magnetic fields composed of 230 points (4 msec. per point) presented once every 3 sec. The rats that had received the burst-firing magnetic fields exhibited elevated nociceptive thresholds that explained about 50% of the variance. A second pattern, designed after the behaviour of individual thalamic neurons during nociceptive input and called the "activity rhythm magnetic field" produced only a transient analgesic effect. These results replicated previous studies and suggest that weak, extremely low frequency, pulsed magnetic fields with biorelevant temporal structures may have utility as adjuncts for treatment of 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".