ArticleFrontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland)2025
The intrinsic reason why complementary tests (clinical neurophysiology, neuroimaging, skin biopsy) cannot establish the diagnosis of neuropathic pain.
Article in Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- DN4 Is Not a Screening Tool for Small Fiber Neuropathy: An Expected Result.European journal of neurology · 2026Article
- Proposal to refine the mechanistic classification of chronic pain and corresponding clinical symptomatology.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The intrinsic reason why it is relevant to introduce the concept of "small fiber neuralgia" into the taxonomy of pain disorders.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Neuropathic pain is defined as pain caused by a lesion or disease of the somatosensory nervous system. Current algorithms for neuropathic pain diagnosis include patient history, clinical examination, and complementary tests to confirm a lesion or disease of the somatosensory nervous system, able to change the diagnosis of neuropathic pain from probable to definite. These tests include clinical neurophysiology, such as pain-related evoked potentials, quantitative sensory testing, skin biopsy to measure intraepidermal nerve fiber density, or magnetic resonance imaging. However, these tests are especially relevant to demonstrate a structural lesion of the somatosensory system leading to sensory deficit, but they cannot establish a causal link between nervous lesion and the presence of pain. Similar lesions of the somatosensory nervous system may be accompanied by pain or not, while neuropathic pain can be a matter of sensitization or hyperexcitability of somatosensory structures without overt structural lesion. Even the existence of hyperexcitability of nociceptive pathways, revealed by neurophysiological or genetic tests, may contribute to the emergence of pain, but may not be sufficient to affirm that this results in ongoing neuropathic pain. Thus, various complementary tests can be useful to identify a lesion of the somatosensory nervous system, but not to confirm the presence of associated neuropathic pain. Clinical assessment, considering disease history, symptom descriptors and a plausible neuroanatomical distribution, remains the cornerstone of the diagnosis of neuropathic pain, while paraclinical findings must be interpreted with caution in this regard.
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.