Cortical Thickness Alterations in Chronic Pain Disorder: An Exploratory MRI Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Chronic pain disorder (CPD) has been associated with brain changes, especially in limbic circuits. However, in most patients with chronic pain, depression or anxiety is a common comorbidity. In this exploratory and naturalistic study, we investigated brain cortical thickness (CTh) differences between patients with CPD and healthy controls, with consideration of concurrent psychiatric symptoms. METHODS: Twenty-three patients with CPD and 23 age- and sex-matched healthy volunteers were included in this study. CTh was estimated using Freesurfer on high-resolution three-dimensional T1-weighted images acquired with a 3T scanner. Group differences were investigated using an analysis of covariance model that included age, sex, and Beck Depression Inventory I and Trait Anxiety Inventory scores as covariates. The relationship between CTh and Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) scores was also investigated in patients. Data were corrected for multiplicity using the False Discovery Rate approach (q < .05). RESULTS: The comparison between groups using demographics and Beck Depression Inventory I scores as covariates showed thinner cortex in patients compared with controls, after correction for multiplicity in the left precentral (F(1,42) = 21.9, p < .05) and postcentral gyri (F(1,42) = 26.9, p < .05) and in the left inferior temporal sulcus (F(1,42) = 19.6, p < .05). Moreover, using the Trait Anxiety Inventory as covariate, a trend toward significance (p < .001 uncorrected) was seen for the left precentral gyrus (F(1,42) = 13.8), right middle frontal (F(1,42) = 14.3) and inferior parietal gyri (F(1,42) = 13.4), and right anterior temporal pole (F(1,42) = 15.9). CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that brain morphological differences between patients with chronic pain disorder and healthy controls are localized to regions that correspond to sensory as well as affective dimensions of pain processing.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".