Human assumed central sensitization in people with acute non‐specific low back pain: A cross‐sectional study of the association with brain‐derived neurotrophic factor, clinical, psychological and demographic factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Early evidence suggests human assumed central sensitization (HACS) is present in some people with acute low back pain (LBP). Factors influencing individual variation in HACS during acute LBP have not been fully explored. We aimed to examine the evidence for HACS in acute LBP and the contribution of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), clinical, psychological and demographic factors to HACS. METHODS: Participants with acute LBP (<6 weeks after pain onset, N = 118) and pain-free controls (N = 57) from a longitudinal trial were included. Quantitative sensory testing including pressure and heat pain thresholds and conditioned pain modulation, BDNF serum concentration and genotype and questionnaires were assessed. RESULTS: There were no signs of HACS during acute LBP at group level when compared with controls. Sensory measures did not differ when compared between controls and LBP participants with different BDNF genotypes. Two LBP subgroups with distinct sensory profiles were identified. Although one subgroup (N = 60) demonstrated features of HACS including pressure/heat pain hypersensitivity at a remote site and deficient conditioned pain modulation, pain severity and disability did not differ between the two subgroups. Variation in sensory measures (~33%) was partially explained by BDNF genotype, sex, age and psychological factors. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms that HACS is present in some people with acute LBP, but this was not associated with pain or disability. Further, no relationship was observed between BDNF and HACS in acute LBP. More research is needed to understand factors contributing to individual variation in sensory measures in LBP. SIGNIFICANCE: Human assumed central sensitization (HACS) is present in acute low back pain (LBP) but factors contributing to individual variation are not fully explored. This study investigated the relationship between factors such as brain derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and HACS in acute LBP. Our findings indicate that HACS was present in specific LBP subgroups but BDNF was unrelated to HACS. Combinations of BDNF genotype, demographic and psychological factors explained a small proportion of the variation in sensory measures during acute LBP.
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 | 0.004 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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; 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".