Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31194113›Full record

ArticleNeurobiology of pain (Cambridge, Mass.)

The evaluation and brain representation of pleasant touch in chronic and subacute back pain.

F Nees, K Usai, M Löffler, H Flor

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurobiology of pain (Cambridge, Mass.). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

F NeesDepartment of Cognitive and Clinical Neuroscience, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
K UsaiDepartment of Cognitive and Clinical Neuroscience, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
M LöfflerDepartment of Cognitive and Clinical Neuroscience, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
H FlorDepartment of Cognitive and Clinical Neuroscience, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Central Institute of Mental Health · DEHeidelberg University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

If touch is perceived as pleasant, it can counteract the experience of pain. However, its pain-inhibitory function might be disturbed in chronic pain and this could contribute to pain-related interference. We investigated the perception of pleasant touch and its brain correlates in chronic back pain patients (CBP) compared to subacute back pain patients (SABP) and healthy controls (HC) using soft brush strokes. CBP showed less positive evaluations of touch. We found the highest activation in somatosensory and insular cortices in CBP, ventral striatum (VS) in SABP, and the orbitofrontal cortex in HC. Brain responses were significantly positively correlated with pleasantness ratings in HC and SABP, but not CBP. Further, the insula responses in CBP were positively correlated with pain-related interference and the VS activation in SABP correlated negatively with affective distress. Brain and behavioral changes in the processing of touch and its pleasantness may be a marker of pain chronicity and raise questions about the therapeutic value of pleasant touch in pain prevention and treatment.

Indexed as

BrainChronicityChronic painPleasant touchSubacute pain

Identifiers

PMID31194113
PMCPMC6550103
OpenAlexW2899349204

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.