Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23165262›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Neuroscience2012

Sex differences in pain and pain inhibition: multiple explanations of a controversial phenomenon.

Jeffrey S Mogil

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Neuroscience, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04477694 (The Effect of Diabetes Mellitus on Hemodynamics, Procedure Times, Anesthetic Consumption and Complications in Colonoscopy Under Sedoanalgesia), which is not on this map. Cited by 537 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
537citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04477694 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

The Effect of Diabetes Mellitus on Hemodynamics, Procedure Times, Anesthetic Consumption and Complications in Colonoscopy Under Sedoanalgesia

TypeobservationalSponsorBaskent UniversityRan2020 to 2023Enrolled100ConditionsDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2, SedoanalgesiaArmscolonoscopy under sedoanalgesia
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

537 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. The Effect ofNutrients · 2026
    Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Schmerz (Berlin, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

477 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Jeffrey S MogilDepartment of Psychology and the Alan Edwards Centre for Research on Pain, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec H3A 1B1, Canada. jeffrey.mogil@mcgill.ca

Funding

CIHR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A clear majority of patients with chronic pain are women; however, it has been surprisingly difficult to determine whether this sex bias corresponds to actual sex differences in pain sensitivity. A survey of the currently available epidemiological and laboratory data indicates that the evidence for clinical and experimental sex differences in pain is overwhelming. Various explanations for this phenomenon have been given, ranging from experiential and sociocultural differences in pain experience between men and women to hormonally and genetically driven sex differences in brain neurochemistry.

Indexed as

PainPain ThresholdSex CharacteristicsBrainFemaleHumansMale

Identifiers

PMID23165262

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.