MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901992432 · doi:10.2217/pmt-2018-0035

Amplification of Glyceryl Trinitrate-Induced Headache Features By Noxious Craniofacial Stimuli in Pain-Free Healthy Humans

2018· article· en· W2901992432 on OpenAlexaff
Parisa Gazerani, Brian E. Cairns, Hussain Yassin, Jasmin Tannaz Yousefi, Asiah Rahi Sherzaman, Bettina S. Nedergaard

Bibliographic record

VenuePain Management · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMigraine and Headache Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersAstellas Pharma
KeywordsMedicineNoxious stimulusDiffuse noxious inhibitory controlAnesthesiaCraniofacialNeuroscienceNociceptionInternal medicinePsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: Glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) provokes an immediate migraine-like headache, followed by a delayed migraine attack in migraineurs. In healthy volunteers, only an immediate, less severe and shorter headache occurs. The presence of an already sensitized nervous system in migraineurs may underlie the more intense and prolonged GTN-evoked headaches. We tested if in healthy humans, application of noxious cutaneous and/or mechanical stimulation within craniofacial region would enhance or prolong GTN-evoked headache. MATERIALS & METHODS: Noxious stimuli with a capsaicin patch on forehead, a mechanical headband, or both were applied prior to sublingual GTN (0.5 mg) in 20 healthy volunteers. GTN-induced headache characteristics and sensory responsiveness were recorded. RESULTS: A more intense GTN-evoked headache was produced following application of headband. CONCLUSION: Noxious mechanical stimulation prior to GTN resulted in a more intense GTN-evoked headache.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePain ManagementSame topicMigraine and Headache StudiesFrench-language works237,207