MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102446959 · doi:10.36076/ppj.2007/10/453

Using Peripheral Stimulation to Reduce thePain of C2-Mediated Occipital Headaches: APreliminary Report

2007· article· en· W2102446959 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eugene A. Melvin

Bibliographic record

VenuePain Physician · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMigraine and Headache Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHeadachesVisual analogue scaleAnesthesiaMcGill Pain QuestionnaireOccipital nerve stimulationAdverse effectPhysical therapySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) is an accepted treatment for neuropathic pain. Recent studies have focused on its potential for relieving headache pain. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effectiveness of PNS in reducing occipital headache pain. DESIGN: A prospective, 12-week pilot study involving 11 patients evaluated before and after implantation of PNS systems to treat C2-mediated occipital headaches. METHODS: Prior to and at 4 and 12 weeks after implantation, patients completed the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and Present Pain Index (PPI). Patients also answered questionnaires and kept diaries to record stimulator use, medication consumption, and numbers of headaches. RESULTS: A comparison of pre- and post-implantation evaluations showed statistically significant declines in scores on the SF-MPQ (64%; p = 0.0013), VAS (67%; p < 0.0001), and PPI (68%; p = 0.0009). Most patients (91% and 64% respectively) reported reductions in medication use and numbers of headaches. Patients also reported a reduction in headache symptoms and the impact of headaches on activities. Two adverse events were encountered, one due to a loose connection and, the other caused by lead migration. CONCLUSIONS: PNS reduced headache pain, headache frequency and medication use.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations84
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePain PhysicianSame topicMigraine and Headache StudiesFrench-language works237,207