MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7023523436

Pain Experience and Sensory Changes in Astronauts During and After Short-Lasting Commercial Spaceflight: A Proof-of-Concept Study

2023· article· en· W7023523436 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpaceflight effects on biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMcGill Pain QuestionnaireCancer painSensory systemPain medicinePerspective (graphical)CancerQualitative research
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Andrea K Sauer,1,* Marie Vigouroux,2,3,* Patrick M Dougherty,4 Juan Pablo Cata,5,6,* Pablo M Ingelmo2,3,7,8,* 1Department of Anesthesia, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany; 2Department of Anesthesia, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada; 3Edwards Family Interdisciplinary Center for Complex Pain, Montreal Children’s Hospital, Montreal, QC, Canada; 4Department of Pain Medicine, The University of Texas – MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA; 5Department of Anesthesia and Perioperative Medicine, The University of Texas – MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA; 6Anesthesiology and Surgical Oncology Research Group, Houston, TX, USA; 7Alan Edwards Centre for Research on Pain, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada; 8Research Institute, McGill University Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada*These authors contributed equally to this workCorrespondence: Pablo M Ingelmo, Edwards Family Interdisciplinary Center for Complex Pain, Montreal Children’s Hospital, Room A02.3525, Glen Site, 1001 Boul, Décarie, Montreal, QC, H4A 3J1, Canada, Tel +1 514 412-4448, Fax +1 514 412-4341, Email pablo.ingelmo@mcgill.caAbstract: Space travel has been associated with musculoskeletal pain, yet little is known about the nociceptive changes and pain experience during spaceflight. This preliminary study aims to investigate the pain experience and sensory alterations in astronauts following a 17-day mission to the International Space Station (ISS) on Axiom Space’s AX-1 commercial space flight. Two participants were enrolled, and data were collected pre-flight, in-flight, post-flight, and three-month post-flight. Validated pain questionnaires assessed anxiety, catastrophizing, impact on physical and mental health, disability, and overall pain experience. Qualitative interviews were conducted post-landing and conditioned pain modulation (CPM) and quantitative sensory testing (QST) were performed. Both astronauts reported musculoskeletal pain during and after the flight, which was managed with anti-inflammatories and stretching techniques. Pain levels returned to baseline after three months. Pain questionnaires revealed heightened pain experiences in-flight and immediately post-flight, although their adequacy in assessing pain in space is uncertain. Qualitative interviews allowed astronauts to describe their pain experiences during the flight. Sensory changes included increased mechanical touch detection thresholds, temporal pain summation, heat pain thresholds, and differences in conditioned pain modulation post-flight. This preliminary study suggested that spaceflight may affect various aspects of sensory perception and regulation in astronauts, albeit in a variable manner. More data are needed to gain insight of on gain and loss of sensory functions during space missions. Further investigation into the multifactorial stressors affecting the somatosensory system during space travel could contribute to advancements in space and pain medicine.Keywords: chronic pain, quantitative sensory testing, microgravity, radiation, 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 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)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.195
GPT teacher head0.526
Teacher spread0.330 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicSpaceflight effects on biologyFrench-language works237,207