A Comparison of Functional Connectivity in the Human Brainstem and Spinal Cord Associated with Noxious and Innocuous Thermal Stimulation Identified by Means of Functional MRI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The somatosensory system is multidimensional and processes important information for survival, including the experience of pain. The brainstem and spinal cord serve pivotal roles in both transmitting and modulating pain signals from the periphery; although, they are studied less frequently with neuroimaging when compared to the brain. In addition, imaging studies of pain often lack a sensory control condition, failing to differentiate the neural processes associated with pain versus innocuous sensations. The purpose of this study was to investigate neural connectivity between key regions involved in descending modulation of pain in response to a hot, noxious stimulus as compared to a warm, innocuous stimulus. This was achieved with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) of the brainstem and spinal cord in 20 healthy men and women. Functional connectivity was observed to vary between specific regions across painful and innocuous conditions. However, the same variations were not observed in the period of anticipation prior to the onset of stimulation. Specific connections varied with individual pain scores only during the noxious stimulation condition, indicating a significant role of individual differences in the experience of pain which are distinct from that of innocuous sensation. The results also illustrate significant differences in descending modulation before and during stimulation in both conditions. These findings contribute to a deeper understanding of the mechanisms underlying pain processing at the level of the brainstem and spinal cord, and how pain is modulated.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".