MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136883509 · doi:10.1186/1744-8069-3-14

Neuronal Mechanism for Neuropathic Pain

2007· review· en· W2136883509 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Pain · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsCanada Research ChairsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchU.S. Public Health ServiceNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsNeuropathic painNeuroscienceMechanism (biology)Pain medicineMedicineTask (project management)Chronic painPsychologyAnesthesiaAnesthesiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Among different forms of persistent pain, neuropathic pain presents as a most difficult task for basic researchers and clinicians. Despite recent rapid development of neuroscience and modern techniques related to drug discovery, effective drugs based on clear basic mechanisms are still lacking. Here, I will review the basic neuronal mechanisms that maybe involved in neuropathic pain. I will present the problem of neuropathic pain as a rather difficult task for neuroscientists, and we may have to wait for a long time before we fully understand how brain encode, store, and retrieve painful information after the injury. I propose that neuropathic pain as a major brain disease, rather being a clinic problem due to peripheral injury.

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.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.288 · 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