Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35757170›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2022

The influence of a manipulation of threat on experimentally-induced secondary hyperalgesia.

Gillian J Bedwell, Caron Louw, Romy Parker, Emanuel van den Broeke, Johan W Vlaeyen, G Lorimer Moseley, Victoria J Madden

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.

Gillian J BedwellDepartment of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa.
Caron LouwPain Unit, Department of Anaesthesia and Perioperative Medicine, Neuroscience Institute, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa.
Romy ParkerPain Unit, Department of Anaesthesia and Perioperative Medicine, Neuroscience Institute, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0003-4823-2487
Emanuel van den BroekeInstitute of Neuroscience, Division Cognitive and Systems, UC Louvain, Brussels, Belgium.
Johan W VlaeyenResearch Group Health Psychology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-0437-6665
G Lorimer MoseleyIIMPACT in Health, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3750-4945
Victoria J MaddenPain Unit, Department of Anaesthesia and Perioperative Medicine, Neuroscience Institute, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-5357-4062
University of Cape Town · ZAMaastricht University · NLUniversity of South Australia · AU

Funding

Psychosocial distress, inflammatory reactivity and central sensitization in the pathway to HIV-related pain: characterizing the associations and developing a pragmatic, coping-focused intervention.K43TW011442 · FIC · UNIVERSITY OF CAPE TOWN · PI MADDEN, VICTORIA JOY · 2019 to 2023
$674k
FIC NIH HHS K43 TW011442
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pain is thought to be influenced by the threat value of the particular context in which it occurs. However, the mechanisms by which a threat achieves this influence on pain are unclear. Here, we explore how threat influences experimentally-induced secondary hyperalgesia, which is thought to be a manifestation of central sensitization. We developed an experimental study to investigate the effect of a manipulation of threat on experimentally-induced secondary hyperalgesia in 26 healthy human adults (16 identifying as female; 10 as male). We induced secondary hyperalgesia at both forearms using high-frequency electrical stimulation. Prior to the induction, we used a previously successful method to manipulate threat of tissue damage at one forearm (threat site). The effect of the threat manipulation was determined by comparing participant-rated anxiety, perceived threat, and pain during the experimental induction of secondary hyperalgesia, between the threat and control sites. We hypothesized that the threat site would show greater secondary hyperalgesia (primary outcome) and greater surface area (secondary outcome) of induced secondary hyperalgesia than the control site. Despite a thorough piloting procedure to test the threat manipulation, our data showed no main effect of site on pain, anxiety, or threat ratings during high-frequency electrical stimulation. In the light of no difference in threat between sites, the primary and secondary hypotheses cannot be tested. We discuss reasons why we were unable to replicate the efficacy of this established threat manipulation in our sample, including: (1) competition between threats, (2) generalization of learned threat value, (3) safety cues, (4) trust, and requirements for participant safety, (5) sampling bias, (6) sample-specific habituation to threat, and (7) implausibility of (sham) skin examination and report. Better strategies to manipulate threat are required for further research on the mechanisms by which threat influences pain.

Indexed as

HyperalgesiaPainAdultElectric StimulationFemaleHumansMalePain MeasurementElectrical stimulationHealthy volunteersMechanical hyperalgesiaPainSecondary hyperalgesiaThreat

Identifiers

PMID35757170
PMCPMC9220919
OpenAlexW4283219575

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.