INT92321

From wiki-pain
Jump to: navigation, search
Context Info
Confidence 0.23
First Reported 2000
Last Reported 2008
Negated 0
Speculated 1
Reported most in Body
Documents 3
Total Number 4
Disease Relevance 1.15
Pain Relevance 0.65

This is a graph with borders and nodes. Maybe there is an Imagemap used so the nodes may be linking to some Pages.

Impact (Rattus norvegicus)
Pain Link Frequency Relevance Heat
Fibrositis 5 100.00 Very High Very High Very High
Arthritis 1 100.00 Very High Very High Very High
Pain 25 98.80 Very High Very High Very High
visual analogue scale 3 82.96 Quite High
backache 5 71.28 Quite High
Paresthesia 1 5.00 Very Low Very Low Very Low
Trigeminal neuralgia 1 5.00 Very Low Very Low Very Low
Disease Link Frequency Relevance Heat
Torticollis 4 100.00 Very High Very High Very High
Sleep Disorders 3 100.00 Very High Very High Very High
Arthritis 1 100.00 Very High Very High Very High
Pain 24 98.80 Very High Very High Very High
Low Back Pain 5 71.28 Quite High
Disease 13 30.52 Quite Low
Halitosis 2 5.00 Very Low Very Low Very Low
Mouth Ulcer 2 5.00 Very Low Very Low Very Low
Rigor 2 5.00 Very Low Very Low Very Low
Toothache 1 5.00 Very Low Very Low Very Low

Sentences Mentioned In

Key: Protein Mutation Event Anatomy Negation Speculation Pain term Disease term
OBJECTIVE: To assess the responsiveness of the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ), patient ratings of pain intensity, number of tender points, and total tender point pain intensity score to perceived changes in clinical status in patients with fibromyalgia (FM).
Regulation (responsiveness) of Impact associated with pain and fibrositis
1) Confidence 0.23 Published 2000 Journal J. Rheumatol. Section Abstract Doc Link 11093454 Disease Relevance 0.46 Pain Relevance 0.33
In order to analyse the relative burden of impacts among dimensions, three intuitive descriptors of the causes of impacts were used: "impact value", i.e., number of impacts generating a given causal entity, regardless of the dimensions they were recorded in; "impact extension", i.e., the number of dimensions affected by a given causal entity; and "impact prominence", i.e., the percentage of impacts attributable to a given causal entity in a given dimension.


Regulation (affected) of impact extension
2) Confidence 0.07 Published 2008 Journal Health Qual Life Outcomes Section Body Doc Link PMC2631008 Disease Relevance 0 Pain Relevance 0.04
Meenan et al [19], in a three group (placebo, oral gold, injectable gold) randomized controlled trial, investigated the sensitivity to change of the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales and several other clinical measures.
Spec (investigated) Regulation (sensitivity) of Impact associated with arthritis
3) Confidence 0.04 Published 2005 Journal Health Qual Life Outcomes Section Body Doc Link PMC1084357 Disease Relevance 0.23 Pain Relevance 0.18
We compared the responsiveness of the Cervical Dystonia Impact Profile (CDIP-58), Medical Outcome Study Short Form-Health Survey (SF-36), Functional Disability Questionnaire (FDQ), and Pain and Activities of Daily Living subscales of the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS) in participants with cervical dystonia treated with botulinum toxin A.
Regulation (responsiveness) of Dystonia Impact Profile associated with pain and torticollis
4) Confidence 0.00 Published 2006 Journal Neurology Section Abstract Doc Link 17190951 Disease Relevance 0.45 Pain Relevance 0.10

General Comments

This test has worked.

Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Toolbox