ArticleFrontiers in neurology2024
Pain-induced effects on the pupillary light response under high and low illumination conditions.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2024. 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.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The present study investigated the impact of two different light intensities on the pain-modulated pupillary light response (PLR). Additionally, it aimed to demonstrate parasympathetic and sympathetic influences on PLR parameters in response to pain, as predicted by functional models. Method: A total of 24 participants were included in a randomized, repeated-measures design. The PLR was measured in response to both dark and bright light stimuli within two test cycles. Pain was induced using the cold pressor test (CPT), which involved immersing participants' feet in ice water. PLR measurements were taken during baseline and ice-water immersion within each test cycle. The assessed PLR parameters included initial diameter (INIT), latency (LAT), amplitude (AMP), and re-dilation time (ReDIL25). Along with these parameters, heart rate (HR) and pain ratings were also computed and analyzed. Main results: The CPT caused moderate pain in participants, and the resulting PLR parameters were found to be congruent with the expected parasympathetic and sympathetic nervous system activities. Although the luminance of the stimulus did influence PLR parameters, no interaction with pain exposure was found. Significance: The results showed that different aspects of pain experienced by an individual, as modulated through the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems, are visible in their pupillary reactions to light. Notably, within the range used in the current study, light intensity did not significantly affect the pain-related PLR effects.
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.