Nociceptive Flexion Reflex Threshold in Chronic Pain Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The nociceptive flexion reflex is a physiological, polysynaptic reflex triggered by a nociceptive stimulus activating a withdrawal response. In chronic musculoskeletal-related pain conditions, a decreased nociceptive flexion reflex threshold has been suggested as a possible recognition evidence for central sensitization that may cause alteration of central nervous system processing. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to systematically review reported comparisons of the nociceptive flexion reflex threshold in chronic pain patients and healthy individuals. METHODS: Electronic databases covering studies published between January 1990 and December 2019 were systematically searched. After application of exclusion criteria, 20 studies including 28 trials were included in this review. For meta-analysis, we used a random-effects model and funnel plot for publication bias. This research was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42019140354). RESULTS: Compared with healthy controls, standardized mean differences in nociceptive flexion reflex threshold were significantly lower in the total sample of chronic pain patients. Subgroup analysis indicated a homogenous decreased nociceptive flexion reflex threshold in studies reporting fibromyalgia, chronic pain, and joint pain while heterogeneity existed in other included pain conditions. CONCLUSIONS: A lower nociceptive flexion reflex threshold in patients experiencing chronic pain conditions may imply hyperexcitability in central nervous system processing. As a preliminary study, the findings would act as a basis for developing a methodology assisting current clinical practices.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".