MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Human Brainstem and Cervical Spinal Cord during Cognitive Modulation of Pain

2016· article· en· W2523964341 on OpenAlexaff
Roxanne H. Leung, Patrick W. Stroman

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Reviews in Biomedical Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFunctional magnetic resonance imagingBrainstemCognitionNeurosciencePsychologySpinal cordMagnetic resonance imagingChronic painSensory systemMedicineAudiologyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pain is a complex sensory experience, and cognitive factors such as attention can influence its perception. Modulation of pain involves a network of subcortical structures; however, the role and relationship of these regions in cognitive modulation of pain are not well understood. The aims of this research were to evaluate the behavioral effect of cognitive modulation of pain and investigate the neural correlates of this mechanism in the brainstem and cervical spinal cord (SC), using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and structural equation modeling (SEM). We applied noxious thermal stimulation on the C6 dermatome to 12 healthy female participants while they performed the n-Back task. Our findings demonstrate a significant attenuation in pain perception across the group as a result of the task, along with high intersubject variability in the degree of modulation. Using fMRI, our studies characterize neural responses in subcortical regions that are involved in the modulation of pain. SEM analysis reveals connectivity between the brainstem and SC at the group and individual levels, depending on cognitive load and degree of pain modulation, respectively. All together, our research demonstrates the behavioral effect of cognitive modulation on pain and provides insight into the subcortical neural response to the process.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Reviews in Biomedical EngineeringSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207