ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2019
No temporal contrast enhancement of simple decreases in noxious heat.
Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Offset analgesia (OA) studies have found that small decreases in the intensity of a tonic noxious heat stimulus yield a disproportionately large amount of pain relief. In the classic OA paradigm, the decrease in stimulus intensity is preceded by an increase of equal size from an initial noxious level. Although the majority of researchers believe this temporal sequence of two changes is important for eliciting OA, it has also been suggested that the temporal contrast mechanism underlying OA may enhance detection of simple, isolated decreases in noxious heat. To test whether decreases in noxious heat intensity, by themselves, are perceived better than increases of comparable sizes, we used an adaptive two-interval alternative forced choice task to find perceptual thresholds for increases and decreases in radiant and contact heat. Decreases in noxious heat were more difficult to perceive than increases of comparable sizes from the same initial temperature of 45°C. In contrast, decreases and increases were perceived equally well within a common range of noxious temperatures (i.e., when increases started from 45°C and decreases started from 47°C). In another task, participants rated the pain intensity of heat stimuli that randomly and unpredictably increased, decreased, or remained constant. Ratings of unpredictable stimulus decreases also showed no evidence of perceptual enhancement. Our results demonstrate that there is no temporal contrast enhancement of simple, isolated decreases in noxious heat intensity. Combined with previous OA findings, they suggest that long-lasting noxious stimuli that follow an increase-decrease pattern may be important for eliciting the OA effect.
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.