The CanPain SCI Clinical Practice Guidelines for Rehabilitation Management of Neuropathic Pain after Spinal Cord: Recommendations for treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Clinical practice guidelines. OBJECTIVES: To develop the first Canadian clinical practice guidelines for treatment of neuropathic pain in people with spinal cord injury (SCI). SETTING: The guidelines are relevant for inpatient and outpatient SCI rehabilitation settings in Canada. METHODS: The CanPainSCI Working Group reviewed the evidence for different treatment options and achieved consensus. The Working Group then developed clinical considerations for each recommendation. Recommendations for research are also included. RESULTS: Twelve recommendations were developed for the management of neuropathic pain after SCI. The recommendations address both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment modalities. CONCLUSIONS: An expert Working Group developed recommendations for the treatment of neuropathic pain after SCI that should be used to inform practice.
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 | 0.064 | 0.194 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.006 |
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".