C-fiber-related brain responses evoked by laser heat pulses applied to the back
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to examine C-fiber-related brain responses evoked by laser heat stimuli applied to the lumbar area, and to determine the stimulation protocol that produces the most reliable responses. Thirty healthy volunteers completed the study. Combinations of different stimuli (single pulses or trains of three pulses) with different pulse durations (7 or 14 ms) were used to compare C-fiber-related brain responses between protocols . The four protocols elicited comparable C-fiber-related brain responses to laser heat pulses. However, pulse trains of 7 ms pulses at 0.67 Hz elicited C-LEPs in the greatest proportion of participants (86.7 %). C-LEPs occurred within a 500 ms to 1500 ms post-stimulus time window, consistent with the perception associated with C-fiber activation. These results provide novel data on C-fiber-related brain responses to painful stimuli and a reliable stimulation protocol for future studies on low back pain. • Laser pulse trains applied to the back produce temporal summation of second pain. • These stimuli also allow the detection of C-fiber brain responses in most individuals. • This provides a reliable stimulation protocol for future studies on low back 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 | 0.000 | 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".