ReviewFrontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland)2026
Mechanisms and clinical application of photobiomodulation in pain therapy: a mini review.
Review in Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland), 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chronic pain remains a major clinical challenge, creating a need for safe, non-pharmacological interventions. This narrative mini-review examines two light-based approaches that differ in their sites of action and treatment parameters: visual-light exposure and local red or near-infrared light-emitting diode photobiomodulation. Visual-light exposure acts through retinal and central neural circuits, including pathways involving the ventrolateral geniculate nucleus, dorsal raphe nucleus, periaqueductal gray, medial secondary visual cortex, and anterior cingulate cortex. Its effects are wavelength- and context-dependent. Green light has generally produced antinociceptive effects in preclinical studies and preliminary clinical benefits in migraine, whereas visual exposure to red light has predominantly been associated with increased pain. White light can either facilitate or suppress pain depending on irradiance, exposure duration, circadian timing, and clinical context. By contrast, locally applied red or near-infrared LEDs have reduced pain in several preclinical models and limited clinical studies through peripheral opioid signaling, modulation of nitric oxide and nociceptor sensitization, and anti-inflammatory and antioxidant effects. The opposing effects of visual and local red light indicate that wavelength alone does not determine the pain response; exposure route, target tissue, dose, timing, and baseline pain state are also critical. Although visual-light interventions and local LED PBM appear promising as adjuncts to conventional treatment, the evidence remains limited by heterogeneous protocols, small clinical samples, and incomplete dosimetric reporting. Future studies should use standardized parameters, rigorous controls, and condition-specific protocols to establish efficacy and identify patients most likely to benefit.
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.