MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W224216610 · doi:10.1155/2004/605328

Pain Disorder, Hysteria or Somatization?

2004· review· en· W224216610 on OpenAlexaff
Harold Merskey

Bibliographic record

VenuePain Research and Management · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHysteriaSomatizationOpiumDilemmaPain disorderPsychologyMedicinePsychoanalysisPsychiatryHistoryChronic painPhilosophyAnxietyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pain used to be a simple issue. It was caused by physical injury or disease and the sufferer had to rest and take opium. That was about two hundred years ago. A few scattered commentators from Jeremiah (Lamentations I:12‐13) to Montaigne (1) had the idea that emotion could cause pain or influence it. The development of anatomical knowledge, closely followed by physiology and then pathology, produced a dilemma. There were many pains that could not be explained by the most modern physical methods of the nineteenth century. Hodgkiss (2) has tersely labelled the problem as "pain without lesion". The nineteenth century solution lay in a diagnosis of hysteria.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.351 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations37
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePain Research and ManagementSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207