Sex and age differences in sensory threshold for transcutaneous electrical stimulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Pain is one of the main symptoms prevalent in most pathologies. Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) represents not only a therapeutic measure, but also a mean to quantify the neurosensory and pain perception in patients with chronic pain. Objective To evaluate the relationship between sex and age with neurosensory thresholds (sensory threshold and tolerance threshold) in the application of therapeutic current in patients with chronic pain. Methods Forty-five patients with chronic pain (30 women and 15 men) aged between 24 and 87 years were selected. Each patient answered the Individual Questionnaire, McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ) and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). Subsequently, the electric current was applied, through which the sensory and pain thresholds were analyzed, as well as the perception of activation of the neurosensory pathways for each individual. Data were analyzed using the SPSS 24.0 for Windows. Results There was no significant correlation (p > 0.05) between a possible depressive diagnosis and the perception of current by the sensory and pain thresholds. Regarding sex, there was a significant difference in sensory thresholds (p = 0.003) between men and women, while no statistical differences were observed between sexes for pain complaint and pain threshold (p > 0.05). For the correlational analysis, a significant correlation (p = 0.05) was identified between the variables BMI and pain tolerance threshold (r = 0.68) for females and age and sensory threshold (r = 0.65) for males. Conclusion The sex and age variables are important in the measurement of TENS parameters because they lead to significant differences in sensory and pain thresholds.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".