Trial reportJournal of neuroscience methods2015
Demarcation of secondary hyperalgesia zones: Punctate stimulation pressure matters.
Trial report in Journal of neuroscience methods, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Human surrogate models of central sensitization: A critical review and practical guide.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2021Pooled it
- Methodology and applicability of the human contact burn injury model: A systematic review.PloS one · 2021Pooled it
- Trial
- Trial
- Somatosensory Outcomes Following Re-Surgery in Persistent Severe Pain After Groin Hernia Repair: A Prospective Observational Study.Journal of pain research · 2023Article
- A single session of hyperbaric oxygen therapy demonstrates acute and long-lasting neuroplasticity effects in humans: a replicated, randomized controlled clinical trial.Journal of pain research · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSecondary hyperalgesia is increased sensitivity in normal tissue near an injury, and it is a measure of central sensitization reflecting injury-related effects on the CNS. Secondary hyperalgesia areas (SHAs), usually assessed by polyamide monofilaments, are important outcomes in studies of analgesic drug effects in humans. However, since the methods applied in demarcating the secondary hyperalgesia zone seem inconsistent across studies, we examined the effect of a standardized approach upon the measurement of SHA following a first degree burn injury (BI). NEW
methodThe study was a two-observer, test-retest study with the two sessions separated by 6wk. An observer-blinded design adjusted to examine day-to-day and observer-to-observer variability in SHA was used. In 23 healthy volunteers (12 females/11 males) a BI was induced by a contact thermode (47.0°C, 420s, 2.5×5.0cm(2)). The SHA, demarcated by polyamide monofilaments (bending force: 0.2, 69 and 2569mN) and a "weighted-pin" stimulator (512mN), were assessed 45 to 75min after each BI.
resultsA random effect, linear mixed model demonstrated a logarithmic correlation between elicited skin pressures (mN/mm(2)) and the SHAs (P<0.0001). No day-to-day or observer-to-observer differences in SHAs were observed. Intraclass correlation coefficients, in the range of 0.51 to 0.84, indicated a moderate to almost perfect reliability between observers. COMPARISON WITH EXISTING
methodsNo standardized approach in SHA-assessment has hitherto been presented.
conclusionsThis is the first study to demonstrate that demarcation of secondary hyperalgesia zones depends on the developed pressure of the punctate stimulator used.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.