Associations Between Resting Heart Rate, Resting Blood Pressure, Psychological Variables and Pain Processing in Chronic Whiplash-Associated Disorder: A Cross-Sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Autonomic nervous system dysfunction has been implicated in chronic whiplash-associated disorder (WAD). However, the relationship between autonomic variables (e.g., resting heart rate and blood pressure) and clinical factors in chronic WAD is not well understood. This study sought to examine the associations between resting heart rate, resting blood pressure, pain processing and psychological variables in chronic WAD and in pain-free controls. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a cross-sectional study. SETTING: University clinical research laboratory. SUBJECTS: Thirty-six people with chronic WAD Grade II (mean [SD] age 40.1 [14.6] years, 28 females) and 25 pain-free controls (35.6 [13.0] years, 17 females). METHODS: Participants had resting heart rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressure measured. Pain processing measures comprised: (i) pain pressure threshold at the cervical spine, hand and leg, (ii) temporal summation at the cervical spine and hand, and (iii) conditioned pain modulation. Psychological outcomes included measures of kinesiophobia, pain catastrophizing and post-traumatic stress symptoms. Correlations between autonomic variables, pain processing and psychological variables were determined (P < .05, 5% FDR). RESULTS: No significant correlations between autonomic and pain processing variables, or autonomic and psychological variables were found in the chronic WAD group. In the control group, diastolic blood pressure was positively correlated with cervical spine pressure pain threshold (r = 0.53, P = .007). CONCLUSIONS: An association between blood pressure and pain sensitivity was observed in the control group but not the chronic WAD group. Such an association appears to be disrupted in chronic WAD, which may infer involvement of autonomic pathways in the pathophysiology of this condition.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.035 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".