MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899367836 · doi:10.1055/s-0038-1660888

Effect of Conditioned Pain Modulation on Somatosensory Profile in Surgical Models of Osteoarthritis Pain in Rats and Dogs

2018· article· en· W2899367836 on OpenAlexaff
Colombe Otis, Beatriz P. Monteiro, Maxim Moreau, Katrine Ann Cristofanilli, Dalia Aoudj, Malo Tardif, Jean‐Pierre Pelletier, José Luis Castillo, Bertrand Lussier, Éric Troncy

Bibliographic record

VenueVeterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsteoarthritisMedicineSomatosensory systemStimulus (psychology)Somatosensory evoked potentialAnesthesiaConditioningPathologyPsychologyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: The objective was to compare the effect of conditioning stimulus (CS) on somatosensory changes in animal models of osteoarthritis (OA) pain. Materials and Methods: OA model was surgically induced in right hind stifle at day (D) 0. Rats ( n = 48/Sprague-Dawley/female/ovariectomized–OVX–) were divided in four groups: OA-OVX placebo/ OA-OVX positive analgesic–PA–: pregabalin; oral; 30 mg/kg and carprofen; subcutaneous; 5 mg/kg/naïve-OVX/naïve-normal. OA-dogs ( n = 6/sterilized: female = 4; male = 2) received a placebo. Quantitative sensory testing (QST) included punctate tactile (rats; paw withdrawal threshold (PWT); D–1; D7; D14; D21; D35; D49: D56) and mechanical (dogs; D–1, week–W–4; W7; W9) allodynia evaluation, pre- and post-CS. Mixed model and Student’s t tests were applied (α = 0.05). Results: Dynamic CS increased QST (D–1) threshold in rats ( p < 0.023), but not in dogs ( p > 0.922). Secondary allodynia (ipsilateral) was noted in OA rats (D7; p < 0.035) and in placebo group (D7-D56). CS increased PWT in placebo group, corresponding to an efficient conditioning pain modulation (CPM) (D21; D35; p > 0.107). Central sensitization (contralateral) was observed in placebo rats compared with PA (D14) and all other groups (D56); p < 0.004. The post-CS contralateral PWT increase counteracted the secondary allodynia present pre-CS ( p > 0.062). An efficient CPM effect was observed for all time-points in PA and placebo OA rats. Primary allodynia was present in OA dogs at W4 with a nadir at W7; p = 0.038 without a CPM effect. Discussion: OA animals developed allodynia, supporting peripheral and central sensitization. Post-CS response was variable in rats within time, supporting a possible fatigue in CPM (activation–alteration). In laboratory dogs, the stress-induced analgesia (baseline) complexified the CPM manifestation. Acknowledgements: The authors would like to thank ArthroLab’s personnel for their technical assistance. There was not proprietary interest or funding provided for this project. Dr. Beatriz Monteiro is a recipient of the Vanier Canada Graduate Scholarship.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVeterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and TraumatologySame topicPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207