Interactions entre la kinésiophobie, le système moteur et la modulation descendante de la douleur : adaptations et stratégies sensorimotrices face à une douleur expérimentale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction : Knowledge about the role of kinesophobia in the chronicization of pain is limited. This work therefore sought to associate neurophysiological aspects to try to understand how it is involved in this chronicization. In addition, an alternative measurement tool for kinesiophobia was translated and validated in French. Methods : Five studies were conducted. The first three sought to evaluate the relationships between kinesiophobia and adaptations induced by shoulder pain on the descending pain modulation system in 20 subjects (via conditioned pain modulation), corticospinal excitability (via recruitment curves in transcranial magnetic simulation), as well as on the kinematics, muscle activity and muscle synergies of the shoulder (in 30 subjects) during a pointing task. The fourth study evaluated the feasibility of inducing kinesiophobia with a false ultrasound diagnosis in 20 subjects (including 10 controls) while measuring the effect on corticospinal excitability. The fifth translated and validated the scale of the components of fear and avoidance in a study of 55 chronic pain patients. Results : for the first three studies, pain reduced shoulder muscle activity and, coupled with high kinesiophobia, led to a reduction in the distance traveled by the finger to the target. Correlations were found between the kinesiophobia score and the variation in the slopes of the recruitment curves ans between the variation in S₅₀ and the dot product of the synergies. Negative correlations were found between conditioned pain modulation and variation in recruitment curve slopes and between variation in S₅₀ and kinesiophobia scores. The fourth study revealed that a false diagnosis had no impact on kinesiophobia or corticospinal excitability due to the absence of a history of pain in the subjects. The fifth study provided better psychometric results than some usual questionnaires. Conclusion : These interactions between the motor system, kinesiophobia ans pain provide clues about the potential elements involved in the chronicization of 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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".