ArticleEuropean journal of pain (London, England)2025
A Parallel Human and Rat Investigation of the Interaction Between Descending and Spinal Modulatory Mechanisms.
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 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Somatosensory and visual evoked potentials and brainstem auditory evoked responses in osteoarthritic cats with chronic pain - a comparative study.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHealthy individuals demonstrate considerable heterogeneity upon dynamic quantitative sensory testing assessment of endogenous pain modulatory mechanisms. For those who stratify into a 'pro-nociceptive profile' cohort, consisting of inefficient conditioned pain modulation (CPM) and elevated temporal summation of pain (TSP), the optimal approach for balancing the net output of pain modulatory processes towards anti-nociception remains unresolved. In this translational healthy human and rat study, we examined whether descending modulation countered spinal amplification during concurrent application of a CPM and TSP paradigm alongside pupillometry since pontine activity was previously linked to functionality of endogenous pain modulatory mechanisms and pupil dilation.
methodsPerceptual (quantitative sensory testing) and spinal neuronal (in vivo electrophysiology) assessment was performed in healthy humans and rats respectively upon application of parallel CPM/diffuse noxious inhibitory controls (cuff algometry) and TSP/wind-up (pinprick) paradigms alongside pupillometry.
resultsIn humans, repetitive pinprick stimulation produced TSP while concurrent application of a noxious conditioning stimulus did not affect pain ratings to a single pinprick stimulus, repetitive stimulation or the wind-up ratio. In rats, repetitive pinprick produced neuronal wind-up while concurrent application of a noxious conditioning stimulus inhibited neuronal responses to a single stimulus and repetitive stimulation but not the wind-up ratio. For pupillometry experiments, dilatory responses did not increase during application of a TSP or CPM paradigm in humans, while reliable rat responses were not obtained.
conclusionsUnder the conditions of our study, spinal amplification mechanisms surpassed descending inhibitory controls while pupillometry did not offer a reliable indicator of endogenous pain modulatory mechanism function. SIGNIFICANCE: In this translational healthy human and rat study, activity in descending inhibitory controls did not counter spinal amplification processes underpinned by wind up. Despite pupil dilation being previously linked to modulatory mechanisms, dilatory responses did not offer a reliable indicator of functionality. For pro-nociceptive individuals exhibiting inefficient conditioned pain modulation and/or high temporal summation of pain, dampening faciliatory mechanisms rather than augmenting top-down inhibitory processes may be a more effective pain-relief strategy.
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.