Individual differences in conditioned pain modulation are associated with functional connectivity within the descending antinociceptive pathway
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: The perception of pain and ability to cope with it varies widely amongst people, which in part could be due to the presence of inhibitory (antinociceptive) or facilitatory (pronociceptive) effects in conditioned pain modulation (CPM). This study examined whether individual differences in CPM reflect functional connectivity (FC) strengths within nodes of the descending antinociceptive pathway (DAP). A heat-based CPM paradigm and resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rs-fMRI) were used to test the hypothesis that an individual's capacity to exhibit inhibitory CPM (changes in test stimuli [TS] pain due to a conditioning stimulus [CS]) reflects FC of the subgenual anterior cingulate cortex (sgACC), periaqueductal gray (PAG), and rostral ventromedial medulla (RVM). A total of 151 healthy participants (72 men, 79 women) underwent CPM testing and rs-fMRI. Three types of CPM were identified based on the effect of the CS on TS pain: (1) Antinociception: CS reduced TS pain in 45% of participants, (2) No-CPM: CS did not change TS pain in 15% of participants, and (3) Pronociception: CS increased TS pain in 40% of participants. Only the Antinociceptive subgroup exhibited FC between the left sgACC and PAG, right sgACC and PAG, and RVM and PAG. Furthermore, only the Antinociceptive subgroup exhibited a correlation of both left and right sgACC-RVM FC (medium effect sizes) with CPM effect magnitude. Women, compared with men were more likely to be categorized as pronociceptive. These data support the proposition that FC of the DAP reflects or contributes to inhibitory CPM.
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 | 0.027 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".