Validation of an index of Sensitivity to Movement-Evoked Pain in patients with whiplash injuries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction: Sensitivity to Movement-Evoked Pain is a pain summation phenomenon identified in various chronic pain populations. Objectives: This study investigated the validity of a procedure used to assess pain summation in response to a repeated lifting task in individuals with whiplash injuries. Methods: Sixty-five participants completed measures of pain severity and duration, Temporal Summation (TS) of pinprick pain, pain catastrophizing and fear of movement, and work-related disability before lifting a series of 18 weighted canisters. An index of Sensitivity to Movement-Evoked Pain was computed as the increase in pain reported by participants over successive lifts of the weighted canisters. An index of TS was computed by dividing the pain reported in response to the final pinprick by the pain reported in response to the 1st pinprick in a train of 10 pinpricks. Results: Analyses replicated previous findings showing a repetitive lifting task–induced pain summation in approximately 20% to 25% of a sample of individuals with whiplash injuries. Analyses also revealed significant correlations between SMEP, TS, and pain-related psychological variables. Hierarchical regression analyses showed that TS and pain catastrophizing made significant unique contributions to the prediction of SMEP. These findings join a growing body of research on movement-evoked pain in persistent spinal pain conditions. Conclusion: The repeated lifting task used in this study successfully induced pain summation in a group of patients with whiplash injuries.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".