Antinociceptive effects of gentiopicroside on neuropathic pain induced by chronic constriction injury in mice: a behavioral and electrophysiological study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gentiopicroside (Gent) is promising as an important protective secoiridoid compound against pain. The present study was designed to investigate whether administration of Gent would alleviate the expression of nociceptive behaviors and whether it would cause the relevant electrophysiological changes in a chronic constriction injury (CCI) model of neuropathic pain in mice. Gent was administered from the seventh day after surgery for 8 consecutive days. Behavioral parameters and sciatic functional index were assessed immediately before surgery and on days 7, 8, 10, 12, and 14 post-CCI, and electrophysiological activities of sciatic nerve were recorded immediately after the behavioral test on the last day. The present study has shown that administration of Gent (at a dose of 50 and 100 mg/kg) increased behavioral parameters from day 8 compared with the CCI-NS group. Electrophysiological data indicated that CCI caused a significant reduction in nerve conduction velocities in the sciatic nerves and the amplitudes of compound action potential, while Gent at a dose of 50 or 100 mg/kg caused a significant recovery of electrophysiological changes induced by CCI. Our data indicated that Gent has antinociceptive effects on neuropathic pain induced by CCI.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".