The late whiplash syndrome: a psychophysical study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Some patients who have sustained whiplash injuries present with chronic widespread pain and mechanical allodynia. This single-blind, case control matched study of 43 chronic whiplash patients sought to examine psychophysical responses to non-noxious stimuli and their relationship to psychological profiles. Symptom Check List 90-R (SCL-90-R), Neck Disability Index and Shortform McGill Questionnaire were completed prior to testing. Qualitative stimuli comprised light touch, punctate pressure, moderate heat and cold. Additionally, sustained vibration was administered using a vibrameter which allowed ramping of either frequency or amplitude. Twenty-eight patients reported vibration-induced pain. No control subject experienced pain in response to vibration. No significant differences in perception threshold to vibration were noted between patients and control group. Twenty-three patients and ten control subjects reported painful responses to cold. Eleven patients and nine control subjects experienced pain in response to moderate heat. Four patients rated punctate pressure and one patient rated light touch as painful. SCL-90-R profiles revealed an overall elevated level of distress in the whiplash group. No significant difference was found between patients with and without vibration-induced pain for any dimension of the SCL-90-R. Pain in response to non-noxious stimulation over presumably healthy tissues suggests that central mechanisms are responsible for ongoing pain in at least some whiplash patients. The additional findings of pain on punctate pressure and hyperalgesic responses to heat and cold stimuli are consistent with enhanced central responsiveness to nociceptor input. These results have important therapeutic and prognostic implications.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".