ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2022
Observation of nociceptive detection thresholds and cortical evoked potentials: Go/no-go versus two-interval forced choice.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Pain scientists and clinicians search for objective measures of altered nociceptive processing to study and stratify chronic pain patients. Nociceptive processing can be studied by observing a combination of nociceptive detection thresholds and evoked potentials. However, it is unknown whether the nociceptive detection threshold measured using a go-/no-go (GN) procedure can be biased by a response criterion. In this study, we compared nociceptive detection thresholds, psychometric slopes, and central evoked potentials obtained during a GN procedure with those obtained during a two-interval forced choice (2IFC) procedure to determine (1) if the nociceptive detection threshold during a GN procedure is biased by a criterion and (2) to determine if nociceptive evoked potentials observed in response to stimuli around the detection threshold are biased by a criterion. We found that the detection threshold was higher when assessed using a GN procedure in comparison with the 2IFC procedure. During a GN procedure, the average P2 component increased proportionally when averaged with respect to detection probability, but showed on-off behavior when averaged with respect to stimulus detection. During a 2IFC procedure, the average P2 component increased nonlinearly when averaged with respect to detection probability. These data suggest that nociceptive detection thresholds estimated using a GN procedure are subject to a response criterion.
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.