Triathletes Lose Their Advantageous Pain Modulation under Acute Psychosocial Stress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Triathletes, who constantly engage in intensely stressful sport, were recently found to exhibit greater pain tolerance and more efficient pain inhibition capabilities than nonathletes. However, pain inhibition correlated negatively with retrospective reports of mental stress during training and competition. The aim of the current study was to test pain inhibition capabilities of triathletes under acute, controlled psychological stress manipulation. METHODS: Participants were 25 triathletes and ironman triathletes who underwent the measurement of pain threshold, pain intolerance, tonic suprathreshold pain, and conditioned pain modulation before and during exposure to the Montreal Imaging Stress Task (MIST). Perceived ratings of stress and anxiety, autonomic variables, and salivary cortisol levels were obtained as indices of stress. RESULTS: The MIST induced a significant stress reaction manifested in the subjective and objective indices. Overall, a significant reduction in pain threshold and in conditioned pain modulation efficacy was observed after the MIST, which reached the baseline levels observed previously in nonathletes. Paradoxically, the magnitude of this stress-induced hyperalgesia (SIH) correlated negatively with the magnitude of the stress response; low-stress responders exhibited greater SIH than high-stress responders. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that under acute psychological stress, triathletes not only react with SIH and a reduction in pain modulation but also lose their advantageous pain modulation over nonathletes. The stronger the stress response recorded, the weaker the SIH. It appears that triathletes are not resilient to stress, responding with an increase in the sensitivity to pain as well as a decrease in pain inhibition. The possible effects of athletes' baseline pain profile and stress reactivity on SIH are discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 teacher head, 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".