MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071636134 · doi:10.1097/aco.0b013e32833dd01c

Nondermatomal somatosensory deficits: overview of unexplainable negative sensory phenomena in chronic pain patients

2010· review· en· W2071636134 on OpenAlexafffund
Angela Mailis, Keith Nicholson

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Anaesthesiology · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Management and Treatment
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersPfizer CanadaEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsMedicineSomatosensory systemSensationChronic painSensory systemPathophysiologyStimulus modalityModalitiesPopulationNeurosciencePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyPsychiatryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review the literature and our current understanding of nondermatomal somatosensory deficits (NDSDs) associated with chronic pain in regards to their prevalence, assessment and clinical presentation, cause and pathophysiology, relationship with conversion disorder and psychological factors, as well as their treatment and prognosis. RECENT FINDINGS: NDSDs are negative sensory deficits consisting of partial or total loss of sensation to pinprick, light touch or other cutaneous modalities. Although they had been noted more than a century ago and appear prevalent in chronic pain populations, they are poorly studied. They may be very mild or very dense, may occupy large body areas, are often highly dynamic and changeable or, to the contrary, very stable and long lasting. NDSDs may occur in the absence of biomedical pathology or coexist with structural musculoskeletal or nervous system abnormalities. They appear to be associated with psychological factors and a poor prognosis for response to treatment and return to work. Recent brain imaging studies provide a basis for understanding NDSD pathophysiology. SUMMARY: NDSDs represent prevalent phenomena associated with chronic pain. Further, research is needed to elucidate their origin, response to treatment, and prevalence in the general population, primary care settings, and nonpain patients.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.110
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations20
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in AnaesthesiologySame topicPain Management and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207