Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39670531›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of pain (London, England)2025

How the magnitude and precision of pain predictions shape pain experiences.

Suzanne M J C Derksen, Maria Konttinen, Anastasiia Myronenko, Ben Seymour, Kaya J Peerdeman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of pain (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. How the magnitude and precision of pain predictions shape pain experiences.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2025
    Article
  4. Short-term variability of chronic musculoskeletal pain.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2025
    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

5 authors.

Suzanne M J C DerksenHealth, Medical and Neuropsychology, Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Maria KonttinenHealth, Medical and Neuropsychology, Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Anastasiia MyronenkoHealth, Medical and Neuropsychology, Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Ben SeymourNuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Kaya J PeerdemanHealth, Medical and Neuropsychology, Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7622-1166

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn Bayesian models including predictive processing, the magnitude and precision of pain expectancies are key determinants of perception. However, relatively few studies have directly tested whether this holds for pain, and results so far have been inconclusive. Here, we investigated expectancy effects on pain experiences and associated affective responses.

methodsIn two studies, healthy participants (n = 30 in each) received painful electrical stimuli preceded by explicit pain predictions. In study 1, the magnitude of pain predictions and administered pain intensities were varied. In study 2, the magnitude and precision of pain predictions were varied, while administered pain intensity was kept constant. Experienced pain intensity was the primary outcome in both studies.

resultsPain experiences assimilated towards both under- and overpredictions of pain. In study 1, however, effects were small, if present at all, for non-painful stimuli and effects were not necessarily larger with predictions of greater magnitude. In study 2, assimilation of pain experiences appeared regardless of precision level, while no significant effects on EMG eyeblink startle responses were observed. Moreover, under- and overpredictions caused disappointment and relief, respectively, with greater disappointment upon precise than imprecise predictions.

conclusionsThe influence of pain predictions on pain might be more complex than assumed in simple instantiations of current theoretical frameworks, with no systematically stronger assimilation of pain experiences to larger and more precise predictions. Since overpredictions are associated with relief, but underpredictions with disappointment, these findings underline the importance of providing correct predictions when preparing for upcoming painful procedures. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Our work supports, challenges, and extends the application of Bayesian and predictive processing frameworks to the influence of pain predictions on pain. Under- and overpredictions of pain yielded assimilation of pain experiences, but assimilation was not systematically stronger with larger prediction errors or greater precision. Moreover, under- and overpredictions resulted in disappointment and relief, respectively. This research signifies the importance of establishing accurate predictions of pain in clinical practice.

Indexed as

Anticipation, PsychologicalBayes TheoremPainPain PerceptionAdultBlinkingElectric StimulationFemaleHumansMalePain MeasurementReflex, StartleYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID39670531
PMCPMC11639048

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.