MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108800425 · doi:10.12968/bjcn.2011.16.1.24

Assessment of neuropathic pain in the community

2011· article· en· W2108800425 on OpenAlexaff
Tarnia Taverner

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Community Nursing · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNeuropathic painPsychological interventionPain assessmentNursing assessmentIntensive care medicineHealth carePopulationPain managementMEDLINEPhysical therapyNursingAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper is to provide the reader with evidence based-clinical guidance regarding assessing neuropathic pain. Persistent pain is a huge burden on health-care provision and the prevalence of persistent neuropathic pain is likely to increase owing to the ageing population. The provision of appropriate relieving interventions depends on accurate assessment. This paper sets out to provide the reader with simple neuropathic assessment tools that can be applied to community care. This will allow the community nurse to identify patients who have neuropathic pain and will therefore enable appropriate management.

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)0.017
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.912
Threshold uncertainty score0.941

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.001
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 integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.258 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Community NursingSame topicPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207