Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38322588›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland)2024

Insights into pain distraction and the impact of pain catastrophizing on pain perception during different types of distraction tasks.

Arash Asefi Rad, Pia-Maria Wippert

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. French-Canadian adaptation and validation of the adolescents' Pain Coping Questionnaire.Canadian journal of pain = Revue canadienne de la douleur · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Hypercapnia Reduces Perceived Heat Pain in Healthy Subjects.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Pain Catastrophizing: How Far Have We Come.Neurology international · 2024
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
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

2 authors.

Arash Asefi RadMedical Sociology and Psychobiology, Department of Health and Physical Activity, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany.
Pia-Maria WippertMedical Sociology and Psychobiology, Department of Health and Physical Activity, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Distraction is commonly used to reduce pain, but the effectiveness of distractions remains inconclusive. Studies have shown that pain catastrophizing could modulate the effectiveness of distraction strategies. The present study aimed to compare various distraction tasks, then control for pain catastrophizing, and examine how this relationship varies with pain intensity and unpleasantness across different distraction tasks. Methods: Forty-one pain-free participants (aged 27.00 ± 5.41) were recruited for a cross-sectional study. Four types of distraction (cognitive, sensory, emotional, and social) were presented, while moderate pain intensity was induced by electrical stimulation. Before starting the experiment, moderate pain intensity was individually calibrated as six on the Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NRS) to control individual differences in pain sensitivity. Each participant performed all four distraction tasks in a random order. NRS measured pain assessment. Pain catastrophizing was measured by the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS). A repeated measure ANCOVA was conducted to examine the effects of pain dimensions during distraction tasks as a within-subject and pain catastrophizing as a covariate factor. Results: A significant difference was observed in the pain intensity and unpleasantness during cognitive distraction. After controlling for PCS, there were diverse associations between PCS and pain intensity across distinct distraction tasks: social vs. sensory, and cognitive vs. sensory distraction. A consistent pattern in pain unpleasantness emerged with minor variations. This interaction underscored notable distinctions between social vs. sensory and emotional distractions, as well as between cognitive vs. sensory and emotional distractions. However, only the correlation in social distraction remained significant in both pain dimensions. Discussion: Our findings reveal that the link between PCS and pain dimensions varies across different distraction tasks, suggesting diverse interactions. Particularly, social distraction, characterized by both emotional and cognitive states, proves beneficial with lower PCS scores; however, this advantage diminishes as PCS scores increase.

Indexed as

experimental painneuromodulation of painpain catastrophizingpain intensitypain modulationpain unpleasantness

Identifiers

PMID38322588
PMCPMC10844527

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.