Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27333768›Full record

ReviewSchmerz (Berlin, Germany)2016

[Psychobiological mechanisms in the pathophysiology of chronic visceral pain].

S Elsenbruch, P Enck

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Schmerz (Berlin, Germany), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Small-Conductance CaFrontiers in pharmacology · 2018
    Article
  5. Schmerz (Berlin, Germany) · 2016
    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

2 authors.

S ElsenbruchInstitut für Medizinische Psychologie und Verhaltensimmunbiologie, Universitätsklinikum Essen, Universität Duisburg-Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, 45122, Essen, Deutschland. sigrid.elsenbruch@uk-essen.de.
P EnckKlinik für Innere Medizin VI, Psychosomatische Medizin und Psychologie, Universitätsklinikum Tübingen, Tübingen, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although visceral pain is of high clinical relevance, it remains poorly understood especially when compared to somatic pain. Nevertheless, interdisciplinary research approaches bridging psychophysiology and neurogastroenterology have contributed to a more refined knowledge about the complex peripheral and central mechanisms of the bidirectional brain-gut axis in recent years. This review summarizes current knowledge regarding psychobiological mechanisms in the pathophysiology of chronic visceral pain in functional gastrointestinal disorders with a focus on irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Special attention is paid to the role of affective disturbances and emotions, particularly psychological stress as well as to influences of cognition and learning on gastrointestinal motor and sensory functions in healthy individuals and patients with IBS. In this emerging field of research, new evidence from the fields of placebo research and pain-related fear conditioning provide new insights into the psychological and neurobiological mechanisms involved in the transition from acute to chronic pain and the maintenance of pain. This opens up new perspectives for innovative treatment approaches for IBS and other functional gastrointestinal disorders.

Indexed as

Abdominal PainBrainChronic PainConditioning, ClassicalExtinction, PsychologicalGastrointestinal DiseasesGastrointestinal TractMood DisordersStress, PsychologicalAffective disordersFunctional gastrointestinal disordersLearningPsychological stressVisceral pain

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.