ArticleFrontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland)2022
Combining Electrodermal Activity With the Peak-Pain Time to Quantify Three Temporal Regions of Pain Experience.
Article in Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pain assessment using physiological responses/markers in different types of pain: a scoping review.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Wearable IoT-Enabled Galvanic Skin Response Device for Objective Pain and Stress Monitoring: Hardware Design and Prototype Development.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Automated Electrodermal Activity and Facial Expression Analysis for Continuous Pain Intensity Monitoring on the X-ITE Pain Database.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Self-reported pain levels, while easily measured, are often not reliable for quantifying pain. More objective methods are needed that supplement self-report without adding undue burden or cost to a study. Methods that integrate multiple measures, such as combining self-report with physiology in a structured and specific-to-pain protocol may improve measures. Method: We propose and study a novel measure that combines the Results: The novel method successfully discriminates the pain reduction effects of the four treatments across both pain models, confirming maximal pain for no-treatment, mild pain reduction for placebo, and the most pain reduction with analgesics. The new measure maintains significant discrimination across the test conditions both within a single-day's visit (for relative pain relief within a visit) and across repeated visits spanning weeks, reducing different-day-physiology affects, and providing better discriminability than using self-reported eVAS. Conclusion: The new method combines the subjectively-identified time of peak pain with capturing continuous physiological data to quantify the sympathetic nervous system response during a dynamic pain experience. The method accurately discriminates, for both pain models, the reduction of pain with clinically effective analgesics.
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.