ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2023
Psychophysical pain encoding in the cingulate cortex predicts responsiveness of electrical stimulation.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2023. 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background: The anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) plays an important role in the cognitive and emotional processing of pain. Prior studies have used deep brain stimulation (DBS) to treat chronic pain, but results have been inconsistent. This may be due to network adaptation over time and variable causes of chronic pain. Identifying patient-specific pain network features may be necessary to determine patient candidacy for DBS. Hypothesis: Cingulate stimulation would increase patients' hot pain thresholds if non-stimulation 70-150 Hz activity encoded psychophysical pain responses. Methods: In this study, four patients who underwent intracranial monitoring for epilepsy monitoring participated in a pain task. They placed their hand on a device capable of eliciting thermal pain for five seconds and rated their pain. We used these results to determine the individual's thermal pain threshold with and without electrical stimulation. Two different types of generalized linear mixed-effects models (GLME) were employed to assess the neural representations underlying binary and graded pain psychophysics. Results: The pain threshold for each patient was determined from the psychometric probability density function. Two patients had a higher pain threshold with stimulation than without, while the other two patients had no difference. We also evaluated the relationship between neural activity and pain responses. We found that patients who responded to stimulation had specific time windows where high-frequency activity was associated with increased pain ratings. Conclusion: Stimulation of cingulate regions with increased pain-related neural activity was more effective at modulating pain perception than stimulating non-responsive areas. Personalized evaluation of neural activity biomarkers could help identify the best target for stimulation and predict its effectiveness in future studies evaluating DBS.
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.