↓ Skip to main content

Magnitude and Temporal Variability of Inter-stimulus EEG Modulate the Linear Relationship Between Laser-Evoked Potentials and Fast-Pain Perception

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Magnitude and Temporal Variability of Inter-stimulus EEG Modulate the Linear Relationship Between Laser-Evoked Potentials and Fast-Pain Perception
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, May 2018
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2018.00340
Pubmed ID
Authors

Linling Li, Gan Huang, Qianqian Lin, Jia Liu, Shengli Zhang, Zhiguo Zhang

Abstract

The level of pain perception is correlated with the magnitude of pain-evoked brain responses, such as laser-evoked potentials (LEP), across trials. The positive LEP-pain relationship lays the foundation for pain prediction based on single-trial LEP, but cross-individual pain prediction does not have a good performance because the LEP-pain relationship exhibits substantial cross-individual difference. In this study, we aim to explain the cross-individual difference in the LEP-pain relationship using inter-stimulus EEG (isEEG) features. The isEEG features (root mean square as magnitude and mean square successive difference as temporal variability) were estimated from isEEG data (at full band and five frequency bands) recorded between painful stimuli. A linear model was fitted to investigate the relationship between pain ratings and LEP response for fast-pain trials on a trial-by-trial basis. Then the correlation between isEEG features and the parameters of LEP-pain model (slope and intercept) was evaluated. We found that the magnitude and temporal variability of isEEG could modulate the parameters of an individual's linear LEP-pain model for fast-pain trials. Based on this, we further developed a new individualized fast-pain prediction scheme, which only used training individuals with similar isEEG features as the test individual to train the fast-pain prediction model, and obtained improved accuracy in cross-individual fast-pain prediction. The findings could help elucidate the neural mechanism of cross-individual difference in pain experience and the proposed fast-pain prediction scheme could be potentially used as a practical and feasible pain prediction method in clinical practice.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 18%
Student > Bachelor 4 14%
Student > Postgraduate 3 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 10 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 6 21%
Psychology 4 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 11%
Computer Science 2 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 11 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 June 2018.
All research outputs
#19,951,180
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#8,672
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,778
of 344,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#195
of 234 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,542 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 344,075 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 234 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.