MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073162601 · doi:10.1016/j.ejpain.2004.01.003

Sex differences in pain and analgesia: the role of gonadal hormones

2004· review· en· W2073162601 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Pain · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHormonal and reproductive studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGonadal hormonesTestosterone (patch)HormoneAnalgesicPain managementGonadal Steroid HormonesSex characteristicsPsychologyMedicineSteroidInternal medicineAnesthesiaCastration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is now strong evidence for sex differences in pain and analgesia. These differences imply that gonadal steroid hormones such as estradiol and testosterone modulate sensitivity to pain and analgesia. The goal of this review is to present an overview of gonadal steroid modulation of pain and analgesia in animals and humans, and to describe mechanisms by which males' and females' biology may differentially predispose them to pain and to analgesic effects of drugs and stress. Evidence is presented to demonstrate that sex differences in pain and analgesia may be both quantitative and qualitative in nature. Current research suggests that sex-specific management of clinical pain will be a reality in the not-so-distant future.

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.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.460

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.236 · 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