MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4414350271 · doi:10.3390/ijerph22091456

A Summary of Pain Locations and Neuropathic Patterns Extracted Automatically from Patient Self-Reported Sensation Drawings

2025· article· en· W4414350271 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Bishara, Elisabetta de Rinaldis, Trisha F. Hue, Thomas A. Peterson, Jennifer E. Cummings, Abel Torres‐Espín, Jeannie F. Bailey, Jeffrey C. Lotz

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesUniversity of California, San FranciscoNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsSegmentationVisualizationChronic painWorkflowPopulationPython (programming language)Nociception

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Chronic low-back pain (LBP) is the largest contributor to disability worldwide, yet many assessments still reduce a complex, spatially distributed condition to a single 0–10 score. Body-map drawings capture location and extent of pain, but manual digitization is too slow and inconsistent for large studies or real-time telehealth. Methods Paper pain drawings from 332 adults in the multicenter COMEBACK study (four University of California sites, March 2021–June 2023) were scanned to PDFs. A Python pipeline automatically (i) rasterized PDF pages with pdf2image v1.17.0; (ii) resized each scan and delineated anterior/posterior regions of interest; (iii) registered patient silhouettes to a canonical high-resolution template using ORB key-points, Brute-Force Hamming matching, RANSAC inlier selection, and 3 × 3 projective homography implemented in OpenCV; (iv) removed template outlines via adaptive Gaussian thresholding, Canny edge detection, and 3 × 3 dilation, leaving only patient-drawn strokes; (v) produced binary masks for pain, numbness, and pins-and-needles, then stacked these across subjects to create pixel-frequency matrices; and (vi) normalized matrices with min–max scaling and rendered heat maps. RGB composites assigned distinct channels to each sensation, enabling intuitive visualization of overlapping symptom distributions and for future data analyses. Results Cohort-level maps replicated classic low-back pain hotspots over lumbar paraspinals, gluteal fold, and posterior thighs, while exposing less-recognized clusters along the lateral hip and lower abdomen. Neuropathic-leaning drawings displayed broader leg involvement than purely nociceptive patterns. Conclusions Our automated workflow converts pen-on-paper pain drawings into machine-readable digitized images and heat maps at the population scale, laying practical groundwork for spatially informed, precision management of chronic LBP.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.322 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health→Same topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation→French-language works237,207→