ArticleJournal of pain research2019
Thermal and mechanical quantitative sensory testing values among healthy African American adults.
Article in Journal of pain research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reliability of Electrical Threshold Testing for Assessing Sensory, Motor and Pain Thresholds: An Exploratory Study in Active Subjects.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2026Article
- Single nucleotide polymorphisms and sickle cell disease-related pain: a systematic review.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- HUMAN STUDYExperimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.) · 2022Article
- A Stress and Pain Self-management mHealth App for Adult Outpatients With Sickle Cell Disease: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Study.JMIR research protocols · 2022Article
- Analysis ofFrontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Can within-subject comparisons of thermal thresholds be used for diagnostic purposes?Clinical neurophysiology practice · 2021Article
- Sensitivities to Thermal and Mechanical Stimuli: Adults With Sickle Cell Disease Compared to Healthy, Pain-Free African American Controls.The journal of painArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeOnly a few studies have reported quantitative sensory testing (QST) reference values for healthy African Americans, and those studies are limited in sample size and age of participants. The study purpose was to characterize QST values in healthy, pain-free African American adults and older adults whose prior pain experiences and psychological status were also measured. We examined the QST values for differences by sex, age, and body test site. PATIENTS AND
methodsA cross-sectional sample of 124 pain-free African American adults (age 18-69 years, 49% female) completed demographic and self-reported pain, fatigue and psychosocial measures. QST was performed to obtain thermal and mechanical responses and associated pain intensity levels.
resultsWe found thermal detection values at the anterior forearm were (29.2 °C±1.6) for cool detection (CD) and (34.5 °C±1.2) for warm detection (WD). At that site the sample had cold pain threshold (CPTh) (26.3 °C±5.0), heat pain threshold (HPTh) (37.8 °C±3.6), and mechanical pain thresholds (MPTH) (16.7±22.2 grams of force, gF). There was a significant between sex difference for WD, with women being more sensitive (q=0.027). Lower body sites were less sensitive than upper body sites across all thermal modalities (q<0.003), but not for the mechanical modality.
conclusionThe QST values from this protocol at the anterior forearm indicate that the healthy African American adults had average thermal pain thresholds close to the temperature of adaptation and average MPTh under 20 gF. Differences in responses to thermal and mechanical stimuli for upper verses lower body were consistent with prior research.
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.