MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Comprehensive Review of Pain Interference on Postural Control: From Experimental to Chronic Pain

2022· review· en· W4280617019 on OpenAlexaff
Frédéric Viseux, Martin Simoneau, Maxime Billot

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationUniversité LavalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Saguenay–Lac-Saint-Jean
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysical medicine and rehabilitationTrunkProprioceptionMotor controlMedicineLow back painChronic painRehabilitationNeurophysiologyPhysical therapyPsychologyNeuroscienceAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motor control, movement impairment and postural control recovery targeted in rehabilitation could be affected by pain. The main objective of this comprehensive review is to provide a synthesis of the effect of experimental and chronic pain on postural control throughout the available literature. After presenting the neurophysiological pathways of pain, we demonstrated that pain, preferentially localized at low back or in the leg induced postural control alteration. While proprioceptive and cortical excitability seems modified with pain, spinal modulation assessment might provide new understanding of the pain phenomenon related to postural control. Literature highlight that the motor control of trunk muscles in patient presenting with low back pain could be dichotomized in two populations, where the first one over-activate trunk muscles, the second one under-activate trunk muscles, and both generating increase of tissues loading. Taking account all this findings, will help clinician to provide adapted treatment for managing both pain and postural control.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207