MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2537164273 · doi:10.1002/ejp.968

Exploration of conditioned pain modulation effect on long‐term potentiation‐like pain amplification in humans

2016· article· en· W2537164273 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Weiwei Xia, Carsten Dahl Mørch, Dagfinn Matre, Ole Kæseler Andersen

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Pain · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChina Scholarship CouncilDanmarks GrundforskningsfondNational Research Foundation
KeywordsLong-term potentiationTerm (time)NeurosciencePsychologyMedicinePhysicsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to explore conditioned pain modulation (CPM) effect on long-term potentiation (LTP)-like pain amplification induced by cutaneous 10-Hz conditioning electrical stimulation (CES). METHODS: Conditioned pain modulation was induced by cold pressor conditioning stimulus (CPCS) (4 °C) which was applied immediately before CES in the active session. In the control session, water with a temperature of 32 °C was used. Twenty subjects participated in two sessions in a randomized crossover design with at least 1-week interval. Perceptual intensity ratings to single electrical stimulation (SES) at the conditioned skin site and to pinprick and light-stroking stimuli in the immediate vicinity of the CES electrodes were measured . Superficial blood flow (SBF), skin temperature (ST) and heat pain threshold (HPT) were measured covering both homotopic and heterotopic skin. The pain intensities during CES process were measured and short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) was used for assessing CES pain experience. RESULTS: Cold pressor conditioning stimulus reduced pain perception increments to weak pinprick and light-stroking stimuli after 10-Hz CES compared with the control session. Moreover, CPCS resulted in lower pain intensity ratings during CES process but without affecting the SF-MPQ scores between two sessions. The SBF and ST increased after CES and then gradually declined but without differences between CPCS and control sessions. CPM did not affect HPT and pain intensity increments to SES. CONCLUSIONS: The CPCS inhibited heterotopic perception amplification to weak mechanical stimuli after CES. The results indicate that endogenous descending inhibitory systems might play a role against development of non-nociceptive perception amplificatory states (e.g. allodynia). SIGNIFICANCE: Conditioned pain modulation (CPM) may play a role in inhibiting the pain amplificatory process at the central nervous system and prompting central desensitization. CPM has a special inhibition effect for the development of perception amplification to non-painful mechanical stimuli.

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)0.014
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.792
Threshold uncertainty score0.490

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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