Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans le présent article, nous passons en revue la littérature émergente suggérant un rôle clé de la dopamine dans la perception de la douleur, incluant : (i) des études en tomographie par émission de positrons ciblant les récepteurs dopaminergiques D2 ; (ii) des études génétiques sur les récepteurs de la dopamine et l’une de ses enzymes de dégradation ; (iii) des études pharmacologiques mesurant les effets sur la douleur des antiparkinsoniens, du bupropion et des antipsychotiques ; de même que (iv) des études induisant des douleurs expérimentales auprès de pathologies neuropsychiatriques (maladie de Parkinson et schizophrénie) où la dopamine est dysfonctionnelle. Nous proposons ensuite comme hypothèse intégrative que la dopamine serait impliquée dans les systèmes de modulation de la douleur, et suggérons d’investiguer le rôle de ce neurotransmetteur dans les conditions douloureuses où ces systèmes fonctionnent anormalement, comme c’est le cas dans la fibromyalgie.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".