Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35384855›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2022

Differences in Learning and Persistency Characterizing Behavior in Chronic Pain for the Iowa Gambling Task: Web-Based Laboratory-in-the-Field Study.

Lili Zhang, Himanshu Vashisht, Alekhya Nethra, Brian Slattery, Tomas Ward

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
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

5 authors.

Lili Zhang *School of Computing, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-2203-2949
Himanshu VashishtSchool of Computing, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-2726-946X
Alekhya NethraSchool of Computing, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0001-9707-9453
Brian SlatterySchool of Psychology, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0001-8342-5781
Tomas WardSchool of Computing, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-6173-6607

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChronic pain is a significant worldwide health problem. It has been reported that people with chronic pain experience decision-making impairments, but these findings have been based on conventional laboratory experiments to date. In such experiments, researchers have extensive control of conditions and can more precisely eliminate potential confounds. In contrast, there is much less known regarding how chronic pain affects decision-making captured via laboratory-in-the-field experiments. Although such settings can introduce more experimental uncertainty, collecting data in more ecologically valid contexts can better characterize the real-world impact of chronic pain.

objectiveWe aim to quantify decision-making differences between individuals with chronic pain and healthy controls in a laboratory-in-the-field environment by taking advantage of internet technologies and social media.

methodsA cross-sectional design with independent groups was used. A convenience sample of 45 participants was recruited through social media: 20 (44%) participants who self-reported living with chronic pain, and 25 (56%) people with no pain or who were living with pain for <6 months acting as controls. All participants completed a self-report questionnaire assessing their pain experiences and a neuropsychological task measuring their decision-making (ie, the Iowa Gambling Task) in their web browser at a time and location of their choice without supervision.

resultsStandard behavioral analysis revealed no differences in learning strategies between the 2 groups, although qualitative differences could be observed in the learning curves. However, computational modeling revealed that individuals with chronic pain were quicker to update their behavior than healthy controls, which reflected their increased learning rate (95% highest-posterior-density interval [HDI] 0.66-0.99) when fitted to the Values-Plus-Perseverance model. This result was further validated and extended on the Outcome-Representation Learning model as higher differences (95% HDI 0.16-0.47) between the reward and punishment learning rates were observed when fitted to this model, indicating that individuals with chronic pain were more sensitive to rewards. It was also found that they were less persistent in their choices during the Iowa Gambling Task compared with controls, a fact reflected by their decreased outcome perseverance (95% HDI -4.38 to -0.21) when fitted using the Outcome-Representation Learning model. Moreover, correlation analysis revealed that the estimated parameters had predictive value for the self-reported pain experiences, suggesting that the altered cognitive parameters could be potential candidates for inclusion in chronic pain assessments.

conclusionsWe found that individuals with chronic pain were more driven by rewards and less consistent when making decisions in our laboratory-in-the-field experiment. In this case study, it was demonstrated that, compared with standard statistical summaries of behavioral performance, computational approaches offered superior ability to resolve, understand, and explain the differences in decision-making behavior in the context of chronic pain outside the laboratory.

Indexed as

Chronic PainGamblingCross-Sectional StudiesDecision MakingHumansInternetNeuropsychological TestsRewardchronic paincomputational modelingdecision-makingIowa Gambling Tasklab-in-the-field experiment

Identifiers

PMID35384855
PMCPMC9021953

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.