MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Postherpetic Neuralgia

2002· article· en· W4244112855 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePain Practice · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHerpesvirus Infections and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPostherpetic neuralgiaMedicineIntensive care medicineLidocaineRandomized controlled trialClinical trialEpidemiologyPsychiatryAlternative medicineSurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article reviews the definition, epidemiology, pathology, clinical features, and treatment of postherpetic neuralgia (PHN). Much of this information is well established. However, there is some important new information about the pathology that may shed light on the pathogenesis of this disorder. The exciting prospect exists of the prevention of PHN by vaccination and by early, aggressive treatment of herpes zoster. This is important because current treatment approaches have significant limitations. We now have certain antidepressants, anticonvulsants, opioids, and the topical agent lidocaine that have been scientifically shown by randomized controlled trials to be effective in this disorder. However, all of these have a modest effect at best and newer treatments are necessary. Prevention may be very important for the 30% to 50% of the patients who either do not respond at all or do not respond well. Regional anesthetic procedures do not have a good scientific basis for either acute zoster or established PHN, but remain a reasonable alternative for some patients. This article addresses the issue of how effective the current treatments really are and gives practical guidelines for management.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0030.003

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.265 · 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