Neural Correlates of Cognitive Modulation of Pain Perception in the Human Brainstem and Cervical Spinal Cord using Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pain is a multifaceted and malleable sensory experience that is processed at all levels of the central nervous system (CNS). The experience of pain can vary widely across a healthy population and even within an individual and can be influenced by cognitive factors such as attention, expectation, suggestion, and attitudes. The neurophysiological role of attention in cognitive modulation of pain is the focus for the work presented in this review. Behavioral studies show that pain perception was reduced under cognitive loads that placed a continuous demand on executive functions such as working memory. Neuroimaging, pharmacological studies, and electrophysiological studies provide evidence that the underpinnings of cognitive modulation of pain involve a network of descending modulation of pain among cortical and brainstem structures. However, the role and relationship of subcortical regions in the brainstem and spinal cord during cognitive modulation of pain are not well understood. This review examines the neurophysiology of pain, processing in the CNS, and how cognitive factors such as attention can modulate nociceptive signaling and alter the perception of pain, especially at the subcortical level.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".