Exaggeration of blood pressure‐related hypoalgesia and reduction of blood pressure with low frequency transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reduced pain perception has been observed in hypertensive individuals and normotensive individuals at risk for high blood pressure and may involve increased endogenous opioid release or receptor sensitivity. The present study examined the issue by administering two subjectively similar but physiologically different forms of the pain-reducing procedure transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS). Men varying in resting blood pressure and parental history of hypertension participated in three testing sessions during which was presented (a) high-frequency (100 Hz) TENS; (b) low-frequency (2 Hz) TENS, the type believed to elicit endogenous opioid activity; or (c) no-TENS stimulation. Measurements of blood pressure (BP) and other physiological variables were obtained during this period. Afterwards, two pain stimuli were presented: a series of electric shocks and 5 min of arm ischemia. There was a significant negative association between pain and resting systolic blood pressure (SBP), and pain and parental history of hypertension in the no-TENS and high-frequency TENS conditions that was significantly strengthened by administration of low-frequency TENS. As well, low-frequency TENS produced a modest but significant acute reduction in SBP, especially among those with higher resting levels. These results provide further evidence that opioid mechanisms are involved in blood pressure-related hypoalgesia and blood pressure regulation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".