Influence of circadian rhythmicity on postoperative pain and recovery using a mouse model of incisional wound
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Postoperative pain is a major concern for patients worldwide which can last days, weeks, or months following surgery.Circadian rhythms, controlled by molecular "clocks", govern nearly every physiological function.Such biological clocks are found throughout the body and reside in most cells including those of the immune system.Chronobiological approaches have emerged to study pain and inflammation.While time-of-day effects on pain levels of various conditions have been studied, it remains poorly understood whether the time of injury can alter subsequent pain behaviours.The primary aim of this study was to assess postoperative pain in a mouse model of hind paw incision in a circadian-dependent manner.Incisions were made at four time points (ZT2, ZT8, ZT14, and ZT20).Evoked and spontaneous pain behaviours were measured using the von Frey mechanical sensitivity test, Hargreaves' radiant heat paw-withdrawal test, and Mouse Grimace Scale assays.Testing was performed 1, 3, 5, 7, 10, and 14 days following the incision, at the same time every day, then once weekly until pain resolution.No statistically significant differences were observed between groups or sexes.Although there were no observed behavioural differences between the circadian groups, we discuss potential underlying causes and the implications in both preclinical and clinical settings.This study adds to the literature on circadian rhythms and their influence on pain research in the pursuit of more biologically informed pre-and postoperative care.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".