Rofecoxib and tramadol do not attenuate delayed-onset muscle soreness or ischaemic pain in human volunteers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We assessed the effect of rofecoxib, a cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitor, and tramadol, a centrally acting analgesic, on both delayed-onset muscle soreness (DOMS) and experimentally induced ischaemic pain. We induced DOMS in 10 male and 5 female healthy volunteers by downhill running for 30 min at a 12% decline and a speed of 9 km x h(-1). We also induced ischaemic pain by finger movements with an arterial tourniquet around the arm. In a randomized, double-blind crossover format, we administered rofecoxib (50 mg, daily), tramadol (50 mg, 3 times per day), and a placebo (orally for 3 days), starting immediately after exercise. A 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS) and McGill pain questionnaire were used to describe muscle soreness and ischaemic forearm pain 24 h after the exercise. The pressure pain threshold (PPT) in the thigh and ischaemic pain tolerance in the forearm were measured before exercise and 24 and 72 h after exercise. PPT decreased 24 h after exercise, compared with pre-exercise values (ANOVA, p < 0.05), but neither drug had any significant effect on the PPT. Neither rofecoxib nor tramadol had any effect on time of ischaemia tolerated or amount of finger activity during ischaemia. The VAS and pain-rating index, for both muscle soreness and experimental ischaemic pain, were not affected significantly by either drug. Both DOMS and ischaemic pain share peripheral and central mechanisms, yet neither are attenuated by rofecoxib or tramadol.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".