ArticleScientific reports2018
No perceptual prioritization of non-nociceptive vibrotactile and visual stimuli presented on a sensitized body part.
Article in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sensory processing in medically unexplained pain syndrome. A systematic review.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Perceptual correlates of homosynaptic long-term potentiation in human nociceptive pathways: a replication study.Royal Society open science · 2021Article
- No evidence of widespread mechanical pressure hyperalgesia after experimentally induced central sensitization through skin nociceptors.Pain reports · 2018Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
High frequency electrical conditioning stimulation (HFS) is an experimental method to induce increased mechanical pinprick sensitivity in the unconditioned surrounding skin (secondary hyperalgesia). Secondary hyperalgesia is thought to be the result of central sensitization, i.e. increased responsiveness of nociceptive neurons in the central nervous system. Vibrotactile and visual stimuli presented in the area of secondary hyperalgesia also elicit enhanced brain responses, a finding that cannot be explained by central sensitization as it is currently defined. HFS may recruit attentional processes, which in turn affect the processing of all stimuli. In this study we have investigated whether HFS induces perceptual biases towards stimuli presented onto the sensitized arm by using Temporal Order Judgment (TOJ) tasks. In TOJ tasks, stimuli are presented in rapid succession on either arm, and participants have to indicate their perceived order. In case of a perceptual bias, the stimuli presented on the attended side are systematically reported as occurring first. Participants performed a tactile and a visual TOJ task before and after HFS. Analyses of participants' performance did not reveal any prioritization of the visual and tactile stimuli presented onto the sensitized arm. Our results provide therefore no evidence for a perceptual bias towards tactile and visual stimuli presented onto the sensitized arm.
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.