Corticolimbic anatomical characteristics predetermine risk for chronic pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
See Tracey (doi: 10.1093/brain/aww147 ) for a scientific commentary on this article. Mechanisms of chronic pain remain poorly understood. We tracked brain properties in subacute back pain patients longitudinally for 3 years as they either recovered from or transitioned to chronic pain. Whole-brain comparisons indicated corticolimbic, but not pain-related circuitry, white matter connections predisposed patients to chronic pain. Intra-corticolimbic white matter connectivity analysis identified three segregated communities: dorsal medial prefrontal cortex–amygdala–accumbens, ventral medial prefrontal cortex–amygdala, and orbitofrontal cortex–amygdala–hippocampus. Higher incidence of white matter and functional connections within the dorsal medial prefrontal cortex–amygdala–accumbens circuit, as well as smaller amygdala volume, represented independent risk factors, together accounting for 60% of the variance for pain persistence. Opioid gene polymorphisms and negative mood contributed indirectly through corticolimbic anatomical factors, to risk for chronic pain. Our results imply that persistence of chronic pain is predetermined by corticolimbic neuroanatomical factors. See Tracey (doi: 10.1093/brain/aww147 ) for a scientific commentary on this article. Why some individuals progress from acute to chronic pain is unclear. Vachon-Presseau et al . monitor patients with subacute pain for three years, and show that pre-existing structural and functional connectivity within dorsal mPFC-amygdala-accumbens corticolimbic circuitry, as well as amygdala and hippocampal volumes, represent risk factors for transition to chronic pain.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.007 |
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".