MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Chronic Pain And Levodopa Therapy in Parkinson’s Disease Patients

2022· article· en· W4312067933 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Carlos Henrique Ferreira Camargo, Marcelo Rezende Young Blood, Camila Medyk, Matheus Ferreira Gomes, Marcelo Machado Ferro, Hélio Afonso Ghizoni Teive

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Open Neurology Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLevodopaMedicineMcGill Pain QuestionnaireParkinson's diseaseNeuropathic painChronic painNociceptionPhysical therapyDiseaseAnesthesiaInternal medicineVisual analogue scale

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Pain is a frequent non-motor symptom in patients with Parkinson’s disease (PD) and appears to be related to low levels of dopamine. This study describes the characteristics of chronic pain in a group of PD patients undergoing levodopa therapy. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study. The pain was assessed in 21 selected PD patients with chronic pain using several scales and instruments. Changes in pain response from levodopa use (wearing-off phenomenon) were monitored. Results: The most prevalent type of pain was nociceptive (71.4%), musculoskeletal and dystonic, but neuropathic pain accounted for the highest pain score according to the Parkinson’s Disease Pain Classification System (45.5±30.08). Patients with neuropathic, nociplastic, or nociceptive pain upon wearing-off were those who responded to levodopa (p=0.999). According to the McGill questionnaire, patients with pain upon wearing-off had higher scores in the affective/motivational dimension (p=0.022). Conclusion: Using a new pain classification and scoring tool, this study corroborates a good response to levodopa in PD-related pain.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Open Neurology JournalSame topicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207