Literature DB >> 29518560

Pain, Please: An Investigation of Sampling Bias in Pain Research.

Kai Karos1, Jessica M Alleva2, Madelon L Peters3.   

Abstract

Experimental pain research frequently relies on the recruitment of volunteers. However, because experimental pain research often involves unpleasant and painful sensations, it may be especially susceptible to sampling bias. That is, volunteers in experimental pain research might differ from nonvolunteers on several relevant variables that could affect the generalizability and external validity of the research. We conducted 2 studies to investigate potential sampling bias in experimental pain research. In study 1 we assessed participants' (N = 275; age = 17-30 years) perceived likelihood of participating in pain research. Pain catastrophizing, fear of pain, illness and injury sensitivity, depression, anxiety, sensation-seeking, gender identity, body appreciation, and social desirability were also assessed as potential predictors of the likelihood to participate. In study 2, participants (N = 87; Age = 18-31 years) could sign up for 2 nearly identical studies, with only one involving painful sensations. Thirty-six participants signed up for the pain study and 51 participants signed up for the no-pain study. Study 1 showed that lower levels of fear of pain, higher levels of sensation-seeking, and older age predicted the perceived likelihood of participating in pain research. Study 2 showed significantly higher levels of sensation-seeking in participants who signed up for the pain study compared with those who signed up for the no-pain study. The implications of these findings for future research, as well as the clinical conclusions on the basis of experimental pain research, are discussed. PERSPECTIVE: Intention to participate in experimental pain research was associated with less fear of pain, higher sensation-seeking, and older age. Actual participation in experimental pain research was associated with higher sensation-seeking. This potential sampling bias in studies involving painful stimuli could limit external validity and generalizability of pain research.
Copyright © 2018 The American Pain Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Pain research; external validity; generalizability; sampling bias; volunteer bias

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29518560     DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2018.02.011

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


  7 in total

1.  Vulvodynia, "A Really Great Torturer": A Mixed Methods Pilot Study Examining Pain Experiences and Drug/Non-drug Pain Relief Strategies.

Authors:  Judith M Schlaeger; Heather A Pauls; Keesha L Powell-Roach; Patrick D Thornton; Dee Hartmann; Marie L Suarez; William H Kobak; Tonda L Hughes; Alana D Steffen; Crystal L Patil
Journal:  J Sex Med       Date:  2019-06-14       Impact factor: 3.802

2.  The influence of a manipulation of threat on experimentally-induced secondary hyperalgesia.

Authors:  Gillian J Bedwell; Caron Louw; Romy Parker; Emanuel van den Broeke; Johan W Vlaeyen; G Lorimer Moseley; Victoria J Madden
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2022-06-20       Impact factor: 3.061

3.  The importance of self-efficacy and negative affect for neurofeedback success for central neuropathic pain after a spinal cord injury.

Authors:  Krithika Anil; Sara Demain; Jane Burridge; David Simpson; Julian Taylor; Imogen Cotter; Aleksandra Vuckovic
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-06-29       Impact factor: 4.996

4.  The use of brain functional magnetic resonance imaging to determine the mechanism of action of gabapentin in managing chronic pelvic pain in women: a pilot study.

Authors:  Marta Seretny; Sarah Rose Murray; Lucy Whitaker; Jonathan Murnane; Heather Whalley; Cyril Pernet; Andrew W Horne
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-06-27       Impact factor: 2.692

5.  Different semantic and affective meaning of the words associated to physical and social pain in cancer patients on early palliative/supportive care and in healthy, pain-free individuals.

Authors:  Eleonora Borelli; Sarah Bigi; Leonardo Potenza; Fabrizio Artioli; Sonia Eliardo; Claudia Mucciarini; Katia Cagossi; Giorgia Razzini; Antonella Pasqualini; Fausta Lui; Fabio Ferlazzo; Massimiliano Cruciani; Eduardo Bruera; Fabio Efficace; Mario Luppi; Cristina Cacciari; Carlo Adolfo Porro; Elena Bandieri
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-03-31       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Home Oral Care with Biomimetic Hydroxyapatite vs. Conventional Fluoridated Toothpaste for the Remineralization and Desensitizing of White Spot Lesions: Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Andrea Butera; Simone Gallo; Maurizio Pascadopoli; Mona A Montasser; Mohammad H Abd El Latief; Gioia Giada Modica; Andrea Scribante
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-07-16       Impact factor: 4.614

7.  High-resolution, field approaches for assessing pain: Ecological Momentary Assessment.

Authors:  Arthur A Stone; Alexander Obbarius; Doerte U Junghaenel; Cheng K F Wen; Stefan Schneider
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2021-01       Impact factor: 7.926

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.