ArticleHeliyon2025
Individual variability in cortical representations of tonic pain.
Article in Heliyon, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When people experience pain in everyday situations, the experience is often long-lasting and fluctuating. However, pain research predominantly focuses on artificial brief and repeated singular painful events. Here, we aimed to approximate clinically relevant pain in 152 sessions from 38 participants who underwent four sessions each. We applied variable levels of contact heat pain to the forearm using a thermode. Participants were asked to continuously rate their pain experience through a potentiometer device. In a whole-brain approach, we related the dynamic fluctuations of cortical activity and connectivity to the time courses of pain. We also explored the variability of cortical processing across participants. In an individual approach, we compared the cortical processing pattern of each individual with the overall group findings. The results revealed a large discrepancy between the group results that are usually reported in publications and the 4-session individual processing patterns: the group findings corroborated previous work localising tonic pain encoding to the secondary somatosensory cortex. By contrast, this region was shadowed by a variety of activity patterns across individuals, represented by a low spatial correlation between group statistics and individual results. The current findings challenge the usefulness and applicability of group results. They do not inform us how pain is processed in the brain as none of the participants exhibited the processing pattern of the group statistics. Therapies to relieve pain that rely on the modulation of brain regions will fail unless they are adapted to an individual's unique pain processing characteristics.
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.