Changes in morphine reward in a model of neuropathic pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In addition to sensory disturbances, neuropathic pain is associated with an ongoing and persistent negative affective state. This condition may be reflected as altered sensitivity to rewarding stimuli. We examined this hypothesis by testing whether the rewarding properties of morphine are altered in a rat model of neuropathic pain. Neuropathic pain was induced by chronic constriction of the common sciatic nerve. Drug reward was assessed using an unbiased, three-compartment conditioned place preference (CPP) paradigm. The rats underwent two habituation sessions beginning 6 days after surgery. Over the next 8 days, they were injected with drug or vehicle and were confined to one CPP compartment for 30 min. On the following test day, the rats had access to all three compartments for 30 min. Consistent with the literature, systemic administration of morphine dose-dependently increased the CPP in pain-naive animals. In rats with neuropathic pain, however, the dose-dependent effects of morphine were in a bell-shaped curve, with a low dose of morphine (2 mg/kg) producing a greater CPP than a higher dose of morphine (8 mg/kg). In a separate group of animals, acute administration of morphine reversed mechanical allodynia in animals with neuropathic pain at the same doses that produced a CPP. The increased potency of systemic morphine to produce a CPP in animals with neuropathic pain suggests that the motivation for opioid-induced reward is different in the two states.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".