Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29057285›Full record

ArticleNeurophotonics2018

Using prerecorded hemodynamic response functions in detecting prefrontal pain response: a functional near-infrared spectroscopy study.

Ke Peng, Meryem A Yücel, Christopher M Aasted, Sarah C Steele, David A Boas, David Borsook, Lino Becerra

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurophotonics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Neuroimaging Assessment of Pain.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2022
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Measuring "pain load" during general anesthesia.Cerebral cortex communications · 2022
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Ke PengHarvard Medical School, Center for Pain and the Brain, Boston, Massachusetts, United States.
Meryem A YücelMassachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, MGH/HST Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, Charlestown, Massachusetts, United States.
Christopher M AastedHarvard Medical School, Center for Pain and the Brain, Boston, Massachusetts, United States.
Sarah C SteeleHarvard Medical School, Center for Pain and the Brain, Boston, Massachusetts, United States.
David A BoasMassachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, MGH/HST Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, Charlestown, Massachusetts, United States.
David BorsookHarvard Medical School, Center for Pain and the Brain, Boston, Massachusetts, United States.
Lino BecerraHarvard Medical School, Center for Pain and the Brain, Boston, Massachusetts, United States.
Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging · USCenter for Pain and the Brain · USHarvard University · USBoston Children's Hospital · US

Funding

Objective Pain Measures in Awake Sedated, Anesthetized Individuals with NIRSR01GM104986 · NIGMS · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI BOAS, DAVID A, BORSOOK, DAVID · 2013 to 2016
$2.1M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM104986
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Currently, there is no method for providing a nonverbal objective assessment of pain. Recent work using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) has revealed its potential for objective measures. We conducted two fNIRS scans separated by 30 min and measured the hemodynamic response to the electrical noxious and innocuous stimuli over the anterior prefrontal cortex (aPFC) in 14 subjects. Based on the estimated hemodynamic response functions (HRFs), we first evaluated the test-retest reliability of using fNIRS in measuring the pain response over the aPFC. We then proposed a general linear model (GLM)-based detection model that employs the subject-specific HRFs from the first scan to detect the pain response in the second scan. Our results indicate that fNIRS has a reasonable reliability in detecting the hemodynamic changes associated with noxious events, especially in the medial portion of the aPFC. Compared with a standard HRF with a fixed shape, including the subject-specific HRFs in the GLM allows for a significant improvement in the detection sensitivity of aPFC pain response. This study supports the potential application of individualized analysis in using fNIRS and provides a robust model to perform objective determination of pain perception.

Indexed as

anterior prefrontal cortexdetection sensitivityhemodynamic response functionnear-infrared spectroscopypaintest–retest reliability

Identifiers

PMID29057285
PMCPMC5641587
OpenAlexW2765459893

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.