The timing of the mouse hind paw incision does not influence postsurgical pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronobiological approaches have emerged as tools to study pain and inflammation. Although time-of-day effects on the expression of pain after injury have been studied, it remains unaddressed whether the timing of the injury itself can alter subsequent pain behaviors. The aim of this study was to assess postsurgical pain behaviors in a mouse hind paw incision assay in a circadian-dependent manner. Incisions were made at one of four equally spaced time points over a 24-hour period, with evoked and spontaneous pain behaviors measured using the von Frey mechanical sensitivity test, Hargreaves' radiant heat paw-withdrawal test, and the Mouse Grimace Scale. Algesiometric testing was performed in C57BL/6 mice prior to and at multiple time points after incision injury, at the same time of day, until pain resolution. No statistically significant differences were observed between groups. This study adds to the literature on circadian rhythms and their influence on pain in the pursuit of more biologically informed pre- and postoperative care.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".