ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2020
Evaluation of Potential Pain Biomarkers in Saliva and Pain Perception After Corneal Advanced Surface Ablation Surgery.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effect of tumor necrosis factor-alpha on rheumatoid arthritis-related pain: overview of evidence and mechanistic pathways.Croatian medical journal · 2026Review
- Potential use of salivary TNF-α as a vaccine-induced pain biomarker in people with cerebral palsy and communication disorders.PloS one · 2024Article
- Exploring Non-Invasive Salivary Biomarkers for Acute Pain Diagnostics: A Comprehensive Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Correlation between Biomarkers of Pain in Saliva and PAINAD Scale in Elderly People with Cognitive Impairment and Inability to Communicate.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Nociception related biomolecules in the adult human saliva: A scoping review with additional quantitative focus on cortisol.Molecular painArticle
- Pain Assessment Practice and Associated Factors Among Nurses Working in Public Hospitals of West Hararge Zone, Eastern Ethiopia, 2023.SAGE open nursingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the evolution of a set of proposed pain biomarkers in the saliva of subjects following Advanced Surface Ablation (ASA), in order to determine their validity as objective pain measures.
methodsA multicenter, prospective, and descriptive study was carried out to assess the variations between biomarkers and perceived pain. The Inclusion criteria were healthy subjects who underwent a bilateral, alcohol-assisted surface ablation with epithelial removal (ASA). Pain intensity before and after surgery was assessed by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS). Cortisol, sAA, sIgA, testosterone, and sTNFαRII were assayed at four-time points (V0, baseline; V1, pre-surgery; V2, 1 hr post-surgery, and V3, 72 hrs post-surgery). Comorbidities and Hospital Anxiety and Depression (HADS) questionnaires were administrated before and at 6 hrs after the surgery. All patients were treated with cold patches, topical steroids, topical cold antibiotics, and benzodiazepines after ASA surgery. A descriptive analysis of biomarkers and pain intensity evolution and the agreement between biomarkers and pain was performed.
resultsConcentration of sIgA and sTNFαRII post-surgery was significantly higher at each visit compared to baseline (
conclusionIn this study, sIgA and sTNFαRII are the two potential biomarkers that present correlation with the VAS and these salivary substances showed acceptable levels of reproducibility in healthy subjects.
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.