MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2463182838 · doi:10.1016/j.sjpain.2016.05.023

Effect of conditioned pain modulation on long-term potentiation-like pain amplification in humans

2016· article· en· W2463182838 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Weiwei Xia, Carsten Dahl Mørch, Dagfinn Matre, Ole Kæseler Andersen

Bibliographic record

VenueScandinavian Journal of Pain · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCrossover studyMcGill Pain QuestionnaireLong-term potentiationStimulationAnesthesiaThreshold of painCold pressor testAudiologyVisual analogue scaleInternal medicineBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aim The current study aimed to explore the effect of conditioned pain modulation (CPM) on the long-term potentiation (LTP)-like pain amplification induced by peripheral 10 Hz conditioning electrical stimulation (CES). Methods Sensory changes and neurogenic inflammatory vas-cular reactions induced by 10 Hz CES were assessed in twenty subjects in a randomized crossover design involving two experimental days separated by at least one week. The CPM effect was activated by cold pressor test (CPT) (4 °C) which was applied immediately before the 10 Hz CES in the active session and 32 °C water was used in the control session. Perceptual intensity ratings to single electrical stimulation (SES) at the conditioned skin site and to mechanical stimuli (pinprick and light stroking) in the immediate vicinity of the electrode for CES were recorded. Superficial blood flow (SBF), skin temperature (ST), and heat pain threshold (HPT) were also measured. The pain intensities during the CES process were recorded and the short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) was used for assessing the pain experience. Results CPT reduced the pain perception increments to pin-prick (12.8 g) and light stroking stimuli after 10 Hz CES compared to the control session. Moreover, CPT resulted in lower pain intensity ratings during the CES process but without significant changes in the SF-MPQ scores between the two sessions. The SBF and ST were found to increase after CES and then gradually decline but without differences between the CPT and the control sessions. No CPM effect was found for HPT and pain intensity increments to SES. Conclusions The cold pressor test inhibited heterotopic perception amplification to mechanical stimuli after conditioning electrical stimulation. The results indicate that endogenous descending inhibitory systems may affect pain-amplificatory mechanisms.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.208
Threshold uncertainty score0.420

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScandinavian Journal of PainSame topicPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207