Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31053232›Full record

SynthesisBritish journal of anaesthesia2019

The sensory and affective components of pain: are they differentially modifiable dimensions or inseparable aspects of a unitary experience? A systematic review.

K Talbot, V J Madden, S L Jones, G L Moseley

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in British journal of anaesthesia, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 74 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
74citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

74 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 142 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

14 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

K TalbotSchool of Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia; School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, Queensland, Australia.
V J MaddenSchool of Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia; Department of Anaesthesia and Perioperative Medicine, Department of Psychiatry and Mental Health, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
S L JonesSchool of Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.
G L MoseleySchool of Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia. Electronic address: lorimer.moseley@unisa.edu.au.
University of South Australia · AUCentral Queensland University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPain is recognised to have both a sensory dimension (intensity) and an affective dimension (unpleasantness). Pain feels like a single unpleasant bodily experience, but investigations of human pain have long considered these two dimensions of pain to be separable and differentially modifiable. The evidence underpinning this separability and differential modifiability is seldom presented. We aimed to fill this gap by evaluating the current evidence base for whether or not the sensory and affective dimensions of pain can be selectively modulated using cognitive manipulations.

methodsA rigorous systematic search, based on a priori search terms and consultation with field experts, yielded 4270 articles. A detailed screening process was based on the following recommendations: (i) evaluation of effectiveness; (ii) examination of methodological rigour, including each study having an a priori intention to cognitively modulate one of the two dimensions of pain; and (iii) sound theoretical reasoning. These were used to ensure that included studies definitively answered the research question.

resultsAfter in-depth critique of all 12 articles that met the inclusion criteria, we found that there is no compelling evidence that the sensory and affective dimensions of pain can be selectively and intentionally modulated using cognitive manipulations in humans.

conclusionsWe offer potential explanations for this discrepancy between assumptions and evidence and contend that this finding highlights several important questions for the field, from both the research and clinical perspectives.

Indexed as

AffectPain PerceptionHumansMind-Body TherapiesPainPain Measurementcognitionhypnosisimagerypain measurementpain perception

Identifiers

PMID31053232
PMCPMC6676053
OpenAlexW2943340724

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.