Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39540033›Full record

ArticleJournal of pain research2024

Employing the Artificial Intelligence Object Detection Tool YOLOv8 for Real-Time Pain Detection: A Feasibility Study.

Marco Cascella, Mohammed Naveed Shariff, Giuliano Lo Bianco, Federica Monaco, Francesca Gargano, Alessandro Simonini, Alfonso Maria Ponsiglione, Ornella Piazza

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pain research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Potential applications of artificial intelligence in pain management: a scoping review.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

8 authors.

Marco CascellaAnesthesia and Pain Medicine, Department of Medicine, Surgery and Dentistry "scuola Medica Salernitana", University of Salerno, Baronissi, 84081, Italy.
Mohammed Naveed ShariffDepartment of AI&DS, Rajalakshmi Institute of Technology, Chennai, TN, India.ORCID 0009-0004-2430-7370
Giuliano Lo BiancoAnesthesiology and Pain Department, Fondazione Istituto G. Giglio Cefalù, Palermo, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-2705-1548
Federica MonacoAnesthesia and Pain Medicine, ASL NA1, Napoli, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-5986-3594
Francesca GarganoAnesthesia and Intensive Care, U.O.C. Fondazione Policlinico Campus Bio-Medico, Roma, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-8962-5685
Alessandro SimoniniPediatric Anesthesia and Intensive Care Unit, Salesi Children's Hospital, Ancona, Italy.
Alfonso Maria PonsiglioneDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Information Technology, University of Naples "federico II", Naples, 0125, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-1346-515X
Ornella PiazzaAnesthesia and Pain Medicine, Department of Medicine, Surgery and Dentistry "scuola Medica Salernitana", University of Salerno, Baronissi, 84081, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Effective pain management is crucial for patient care, impacting comfort, recovery, and overall well-being. Traditional subjective pain assessment methods can be challenging, particularly in specific patient populations. This research explores an alternative approach using computer vision (CV) to detect pain through facial expressions. Methods: The study implements the YOLOv8 real-time object detection model to analyze facial expressions indicative of pain. Given four pain datasets, a dataset of pain-expressing faces was compiled, and each image was carefully labeled based on the presence of pain-associated Action Units (AUs). The labeling distinguished between two classes: pain and no pain. The pain category included specific AUs (AU4, AU6, AU7, AU9, AU10, and AU43) following the Prkachin and Solomon Pain Intensity (PSPI) scoring method. Images showing these AUs with a PSPI score above 2 were labeled as expressing pain. The manual labeling process utilized an open-source tool, makesense.ai, to ensure precise annotation. The dataset was then split into training and testing subsets, each containing a mix of pain and no-pain images. The YOLOv8 model underwent iterative training over 10 epochs. The model's performance was validated using precision, recall, and mean Average Precision (mAP) metrics, and F1 score. Results: When considering all classes collectively, our model attained a mAP of 0.893 at a threshold of 0.5. The precision for "pain" and "nopain" detection was 0.868 and 0.919, respectively. F1 scores for the classes "pain", "nopain", and "all classes" reached a peak value of 0.80. Finally, the model was tested on the Delaware dataset and in a real-world scenario. Discussion: Despite limitations, this study highlights the promise of using real-time computer vision models for pain detection, with potential applications in clinical settings. Future research will focus on evaluating the model's generalizability across diverse clinical scenarios and its integration into clinical workflows to improve patient care.

Indexed as

action unitsartificial intelligenceautomatic pain assessmentcomputer visionpain

Identifiers

PMID39540033
PMCPMC11559421

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.