Relationship between the interval before high-dose methylprednisolone administration and chronic pain in traumatic spinal cord injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between the interval before the administration of high-dose methylprednisolone (MP) and pain in traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) patients. METHODS: We retrospectively studied the medical records of admitted patients with traumatic SCI at the Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Tri- Service General Hospital, School of Medicine, National Defense Medical Center, Taipei, Taiwan from January 2005 to January 2010. We examined the relationship between the interval before the administration of highdose MP, and the severity of pain and the presence of neuropathic pain (NeP). Patients treated with highdose MP <8 hours after their injuries were defined as the classical-MP group (n=22), and patients who received high-dose MP >/-8 hours after their injuries were defined as the delayed-MP group (n=10). The patients were mailed questionnaires including the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), and the Douleur Neuropathique 4 Questions questionnaire (DN4Q). RESULTS: The SF-MPQ score in the classical-MP group (9.54 +/- 10.4) was almost 2-fold more than in the delayed-MP group (5.9 +/- 3.5). The interval before the administration of high-dose MP was positively correlated with the DN4Q and SF-MPQ scores, although these differences, and associations were not statistically significant. The increased interval in the administration of MP resulted in slightly greater pain and an increased prevalence of NeP. CONCLUSION: Although the delayed administration of high-dose MP did not significantly increase the severity of pain or prevalence of NeP, it should still be avoided due to the increased risk of serious side effects.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".