Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26826097›Full record

ArticleSchmerz (Berlin, Germany)2021

Quantitative sensory testing (QST). English version.

M Mücke, H Cuhls, L Radbruch, R Baron, C Maier, T Tölle, R-D Treede, R Rolke

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Schmerz (Berlin, Germany), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 84 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
84citing papers in PubMed, 3 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.

NCT05986370 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

The METRIC Study Protocol: an Explanatory Randomized Controlled Trial Investigating the Neurophysiological Mechanisms Underlying the Therapeutic Effects of Spinal Manipulative Therapy for Chronic Primary Low Back Pain

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresRan2023 to 2026Enrolled112ConditionsChronic Low-back PainArmslumbar spinal manipulative therapy, sham spinal manipulative therapy, full spine spinal manipulative therapy
NCT06052085 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Investigation of the Efficiency of Pain Neuroscience Education in Patients With Chronic Pain After Breast Cancer Surgery

TypeinterventionalSponsorHacettepe UniversityRan2023 to 2025Enrolled50ConditionsBreast CancerArmsPain Neuroscience Education, Biomedical Pain Education, Standard Physiotherapy Program
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

84 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Brain Plasticity in Patients with Spinal Cord Injuries: A Systematic Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Tactile Detection in Fibromyalgia: A Systematic Review and a Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2021
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Cancer pain.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2026
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Psychophysical correlates of labor pain intensity and unpleasantness.Journal of psychosomatic obstetrics and gynaecology · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

24 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

8 authors.

M MückeDepartment of General Practice and Family Medicine, University Hospital of Bonn, Bonn, Germany. martin.muecke@ukb.uni-bonn.de.
H CuhlsDepartment of Palliative Medicine, University Hospital of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
L RadbruchDepartment of Palliative Medicine, University Hospital of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
R BaronDivision of Neurological Pain Research and Therapy, Department of Neurology, Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel, Kiel, Germany.
C MaierDepartment of Pain Medicine, Berufsgenossenschaftliches Universitätsklinikum Bergmannsheil, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
T TölleDepartment of Neurology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany.
R-D TreedeDepartment of Neurophysiology, Center for Biomedicine and Medical Technology Mannheim (CBTM), Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
R RolkeDepartment of Palliative Medicine, Medical Faculty RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quantitative sensory testing (QST) is a standardized and formalized clinical sensitivity test. Testing describes a subjective (psychophysical) method that entails a cooperation of the person to be examined. Within its framework, calibrated stimuli are applied to capture perception and pain thresholds, thus providing information on the presence of sensory plus or minus signs. The presented QST battery imitates natural thermal or mechanical stimuli. The aim is to acquire symptom patterns of sensory loss (for the functioning of the thick and thin nerve fibers) as well as a gain of function (hyperalgesia, allodynia, hyperpathia) with a simultaneous detection of cutaneous and deep tissue sensibility. Most of the tested QST parameters are normally distributed only after a logarithmic transformation (secondary normal distribution)-except the number of paradoxical heat sensations, of cold and heat pain thresholds, and vibration detection thresholds. A complete QST profile can be measured within 1 h. QST is suitable not only for clinical trials but also in practice as a diagnostic method to characterize the function of the somatosensory system-from the peripheral nerve fiber receptor to the projection pathways to the brain.

Indexed as

HyperalgesiaPain ThresholdHumansPainPain MeasurementSensory ThresholdsThermosensingPain profileQSTQuantitative sensory testingSensitivity testSomatosensory nervous systemSomatosensory phenotypeZ-score

Identifiers

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.