Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26022539›Full record

ArticleThe journal of pain2015

Placebo analgesia enhances descending pain-related effective connectivity: a dynamic causal modeling study of endogenous pain modulation.

Landrew S Sevel, Jason G Craggs, Donald D Price, Roland Staud, Michael E Robinson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of pain, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. A review of descending pain modulation in humans.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Brainstem Mechanisms of Pain Modulation: A within-Subjects 7T fMRI Study of Placebo Analgesic and Nocebo Hyperalgesic Responses.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2021
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. What do monoamines do in pain modulation?Current opinion in supportive and palliative care · 2016
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

5 authors.

Landrew S SevelDepartment of Clinical & Health Psychology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
Jason G CraggsDepartment of Physical Therapy, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri.
Donald D PriceDepartment of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
Roland StaudDepartment of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
Michael E RobinsonDepartment of Clinical & Health Psychology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida. Electronic address: merobin@ufl.edu.

Funding

BRAIN IMAGING AND PAIN: ANALYSIS OF PLACEBO ANALGESIAR01AT001424 · NCCIH · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI ROBINSON, MICHAEL E · 2003 to 2021
$5.2M
NCCIH NIH HHS R01 AT001424PHS HHS 5R01A T001424
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledThe use of placebo to reduce pain is well documented; however, knowledge of the neural mechanisms underlying placebo analgesia remains incomplete. This study used functional magnetic resonance imaging data from 30 healthy individuals and dynamic causal modeling to investigate changes in effective connectivity associated with the placebo analgesic response. Before scanning, participants were conditioned to expect less thermal pain at 2 of 4 sites on their feet. Visual analog scale pain ratings revealed a significant but small difference between the baseline and placebo sites (mean difference = 6.63, t(29) = 3.91, P ≤ .001, d = .97), confirming an analgesic effect. However, no significant differences in the magnitude of brain activation between conditions were observed via traditional random effects general linear modeling. Dynamic causal modeling was then used to investigate changes in effective connectivity during placebo analgesia. The results indicate that during placebo analgesia but not baseline condition, couplings between brain regions, including those involved in cognitive processes (eg, attention, expectation, evaluation), were significantly enhanced. Specifically, a significantly consistent decrease in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex → periaqueductal gray coupling was found. These findings highlight the differences between pain processing and modulation at the network level. Moreover, our results suggest that small placebo effects may be better characterized via changes in the temporal dynamics among pain modulatory regions than only via changes in the magnitude of blood oxygenation level dependent activation. Further application of nuanced analytical approaches that are sensitive to temporal dynamics of pain-related processes such as dynamic causal modeling are necessary to better understand the neural mechanisms underlying pain processing in patient populations. PERSPECTIVE: Changes in effective connectivity among pain-related brain regions may be more sensitive detectors of the neural representation of small placebo effects than are changes in the magnitude of brain activation. Knowledge of these mechanisms highlights the importance of integrated neural networks in the understanding of pain modulation.

Indexed as

Models, AnatomicNonlinear DynamicsPlacebo EffectTemperatureAdultBrainEfferent PathwaysFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleOxygenPainPain MeasurementPsychophysicsOxygendynamic causal modelingeffective connectivityfunctional magnetic resonance imagingpain modulationPlacebo

Identifiers

PMID26022539
PMCPMC4522336

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.