MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3087477892 · doi:10.1177/0333102420958384

Evidence of localized and widespread pressure pain hypersensitivity in patients with tension-type headache: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2020· review· en· W3087477892 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCephalalgia · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMigraine and Headache Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisDermatologySystematic reviewAnesthesiaMEDLINEInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective This meta-analysis evaluates pressure pain sensitivity values in symptomatic and distant pain-free areas comparing individuals with tension-type headache to controls. Databases and data treatment Electronic databases were searched for cross-sectional or prospective case-control studies comparing pressure pain thresholds in patients with tension-type headache to headache-free controls. Data were extracted by three reviewers. The methodological quality was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. Meta-analyses of trigeminal, extra-trigeminal (neck) and distant pain-free areas in tension-type headache were compared to headache-free controls. Frequency of tension-type headache and gender were taken into account. Results Twenty studies were included. Patients with tension-type headache exhibited lower pressure pain thresholds than headache-free controls: Trigeminal (MD −49.11 kPa, 95% CI −66.05 to −32.17), cervical spine (MD −88.17 kPa, 95% CI −108.43 to −67.92) and distant pain-free areas (MD −98.43 kPa, 95% CI −136.78 to −60.09). Differences were significant for chronic, episodic, and mixed episodic and chronic tension-type headache within the trigeminal and neck (symptomatic areas), but only significant for chronic tension-type headache (MD −102.86, 95% CI −139.47 to −66.25 kPa) for distant pain-free areas. In general, women had lower pressure pain thresholds than men. The methodological quality ranged from fair (45%) to good (40%). The results showed a high heterogeneity and publication bias. Conclusion This first meta-analysis addressing pressure pain thresholds differences in symptomatic and distant pain-free areas between patients with tension-type headache and controls found low to moderate evidence supporting the presence of pressure pain hypersensitivity in the trigeminal and neck areas in tension-type headache in comparison with headache-free controls. Sensitivity to pressure pain was widespread only in chronic, not episodic, tension-type headache (moderate evidence). Registration number: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/R29HY

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.702
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.249 · 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