MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969709992 · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3000349

Identification of traits and functional connectivity-based neurotraits of chronic pain

2019· article· en· W2969709992 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Étienne Vachon‐Presseau, Sara Berger, Taha Abdullah, James W. Griffith, Thomas J. Schnitzer, A. Vania Apkarian

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS Biology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on Drug AbuseNational Center for Complementary and Integrative HealthFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsChronic painTraitBig Five personality traitsPersonalityFunctional magnetic resonance imagingSocioeconomic statusBiologyNeurophysiologyClinical psychologyNeurosciencePsychologyMedicinePopulationComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Psychological and personality factors, socioeconomic status, and brain properties all contribute to chronic pain but have essentially been studied independently. Here, we administered a broad battery of questionnaires to patients with chronic back pain (CBP) and collected repeated sessions of resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) brain scans. Clustering and network analyses applied on the questionnaire data revealed four orthogonal dimensions accounting for 56% of the variance and defining chronic pain traits. Two of these traits-Pain-trait and Emote-trait-were associated with back pain characteristics and could be related to distinct distributed functional networks in a cross-validation procedure, identifying neurotraits. These neurotraits showed good reliability across four fMRI sessions acquired over five weeks. Further, traits and neurotraits all related to the income, emphasizing the importance of socioeconomic status within the personality space of chronic pain. Our approach is a first step in providing metrics aimed at unifying the psychology and the neurophysiology of chronic pain applicable across diverse clinical conditions.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score0.638

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 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

Citations46
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS BiologySame topicFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesFrench-language works237,207