Gender peculiarities of pain syndrome in older age patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction The study of gender-related peculiarities of vertebral pain syndrome course in order age patients appears to be highly relevant. Objectives Study population included 46 female patients and 38 male patients in the age between 60 and 75 years old; mean age was 67,4±6,6 years old. Methods Pain syndrome intensity was assessed using the visual analogue scale (VAS), vegetative disfunction was assessed using A.M. Wayne Questionnaire; the Toronto Alexithymia Scale Results The conducted comparative study showed that the male patients perceived the pain syndrome as more intense as compared to the female patients in lumbar spine: 4,5 ±0,8 vs 3,6±0,5 scores (р <0,001) and in thoracic spine: 4,1 ±1,0 vs. 3,4±1,0 (р <0,05). On the other hand, in vegetative dysfunction assessment, the male patients demonstrated generally lower score: 43,3±7,5 scores vs. 59,6+10,3 in female patients, р <0,001. The results of correlation analysis pf interrelations between alexithymia and pain intensity revealed the differences between the study groups in emotion recognition accuracy (Mann-Whitney U-test = 109,00, р = 0.09): female patients showed lower scores (60,7 ±3,5) as compared to the male patients (74,2 ±2,1). Conclusions Therefore, the vertebral pain syndrome tends to be more pronounced in older age male patients as compared to the similar population of older age female patients. Therefore, vertebral pain syndrome correction requires multidisciplinary approach, including psychotherapeutic support.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".