Literature DB >> 23548484

Pain measurement and brain activity: will neuroimages replace pain ratings?

Michael E Robinson, Roland Staud, Donald D Price.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Arguments made for the advantages of replacing pain ratings with brain-imaging data include assumptions that pain ratings are less reliable and objective and that brain image data would greatly benefit the measurement of treatment efficacy. None of these assumptions are supported by available evidence. Self-report of pain is predictable and does not necessarily reflect unreliability or error. Because pain is defined as an experience, magnitudes of its dimensions can be estimated by well-established methods, including those used to validate brain imaging of pain. Brain imaging helps to study pain mechanisms and might be used as proxy measures of pain in persons unable to provide verbal reports. Yet eliminating pain ratings or replacing them with neuroimaging data is misguided because brain images only help explain pain if they are used in conjunction with self-report. There is no objective readout mechanism of pain (pain thermometer) that is unaffected by psychological factors. Benefits from including neuroimaging data might include increased understanding of underlying neural mechanisms of treatment efficacy, discovery of new treatment vectors, and support of conclusions derived from self-report. However, neither brain imaging nor self-report data are privileged over the other. The assumption that treatment efficacy is hampered by self-report has not been shown; there is a plethora of treatment studies showing that self-report is sensitive to treatment. Dismissal of patients' self-reports (pain ratings) by brain-imaging data is potentially harmful. The aim of replacing self-report with brain-imaging data is misguided and has no scientific or philosophical foundation. PERSPECTIVE: Although brain imaging may offer considerable insight into the neural mechanisms of pain, including relevant causes and correlations, brain images cannot and should not replace self-report. Only the latter assesses the experience of pain, which is not identical to neural activity. Brain imaging may help to explain pain, but replacing self-report with brain-imaging data would be philosophically and scientifically misguided and potentially harmful to pain patients.
Copyright © 2013 American Pain Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23548484      PMCID: PMC3790328          DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2012.05.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pain        ISSN: 1526-5900            Impact factor:   5.820


  20 in total

1.  Neural correlates of interindividual differences in the subjective experience of pain.

Authors:  Robert C Coghill; John G McHaffie; Yi-Fen Yen
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2003-06-24       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Neural correlates of telling lies: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study at 4 Tesla.

Authors:  K Luan Phan; Alvaro Magalhaes; Timothy J Ziemlewicz; Daniel A Fitzgerald; Christopher Green; Wilbur Smith
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 3.173

3.  Pain perception in a man with total corpus callosum transection.

Authors:  B E Stein; D D Price; M S Gazzaniga
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1989-07       Impact factor: 6.961

4.  Central pain in a hemispherectomized patient.

Authors:  H Olausson; S Marchand; R G Bittar; J Bernier; A Ptito; M C Bushnell
Journal:  Eur J Pain       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 3.931

5.  Ratings of experimental pain and pain-related negative affect predict clinical pain in patients with fibromyalgia syndrome.

Authors:  Roland Staud; Michael E Robinson; Charles J Vierck; Richard C Cannon; Andre P Mauderli; Donald D Price
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 6.961

6.  Cortical activation by tactile and painful stimuli in hemispherectomized patients.

Authors:  H Olausson; B Ha; G H Duncan; C Morin; A Ptito; M Ptito; S Marchand; M C Bushnell
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 13.501

7.  Enhanced temporal summation of second pain and its central modulation in fibromyalgia patients.

Authors:  Donald D Price; Roland Staud; Michael E Robinson; Andre P Mauderli; Richard Cannon; Charles J Vierck
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 6.961

8.  Efficacy of multidisciplinary pain treatment centers: a meta-analytic review.

Authors:  Herta Flor; Thomas Fydrich; Dennis C Turk
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1992-05       Impact factor: 6.961

9.  Reproducibility of pain measurement and pain perception.

Authors:  Elisa M Rosier; Michael J Iadarola; Robert C Coghill
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 6.961

10.  The validation of visual analogue scales as ratio scale measures for chronic and experimental pain.

Authors:  Donald D Price; Patricia A McGrath; Amir Rafii; Barbara Buckingham
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1983-09       Impact factor: 6.961

View more
  27 in total

Review 1.  Biomarkers for Musculoskeletal Pain Conditions: Use of Brain Imaging and Machine Learning.

Authors:  Jeff Boissoneault; Landrew Sevel; Janelle Letzen; Michael Robinson; Roland Staud
Journal:  Curr Rheumatol Rep       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 4.592

Review 2.  Distinguishing pain from nociception, salience, and arousal: How autonomic nervous system activity can improve neuroimaging tests of specificity.

Authors:  In-Seon Lee; Elizabeth A Necka; Lauren Y Atlas
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2019-10-08       Impact factor: 6.556

3.  Reply to commentary.

Authors:  Michael E Robinson; Roland Staud; Donald D Price
Journal:  J Pain       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 5.820

4.  Insights for Clinicians From Brain Imaging Studies of Pain.

Authors:  Karen D Davis; David A Seminowicz
Journal:  Clin J Pain       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 3.442

5.  Comparison of machine classification algorithms for fibromyalgia: neuroimages versus self-report.

Authors:  Michael E Robinson; Andrew M O'Shea; Jason G Craggs; Donald D Price; Janelle E Letzen; Roland Staud
Journal:  J Pain       Date:  2015-02-20       Impact factor: 5.820

6.  Test-retest reliability of pain-related brain activity in healthy controls undergoing experimental thermal pain.

Authors:  Janelle E Letzen; Landrew S Sevel; Charles W Gay; Andrew M O'Shea; Jason G Craggs; Donald D Price; Michael E Robinson
Journal:  J Pain       Date:  2014-07-03       Impact factor: 5.820

7.  The Effect of Base Rate on the Predictive Value of Brain Biomarkers.

Authors:  Michael Robinson; Jeff Boissoneault; Landrew Sevel; Janelle Letzen; Roland Staud
Journal:  J Pain       Date:  2016-04-08       Impact factor: 5.820

8.  Tracking local anesthetic effects using a novel perceptual reference approach.

Authors:  Dominik A Ettlin; Nenad Lukic; Jetmir Abazi; Sonja Widmayer; Michael L Meier
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2016-01-20       Impact factor: 2.714

9.  Test-retest reliability of pain-related functional brain connectivity compared with pain self-report.

Authors:  Janelle E Letzen; Jeff Boissoneault; Landrew S Sevel; Michael E Robinson
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 7.926

10.  How do babies feel pain?

Authors:  Manon Ranger; Ruth E Grunau
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2015-04-27       Impact factor: 8.140

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.