Clinical use of Electroencephalography in the Assessment of Acute Thermal Pain: A Narrative Review Based on Articles From 2009 to 2019
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nowadays, no practical system has successfully been able to decode and predict pain in clinical settings. The inability of some patients to verbally express their pain creates the need for a tool that could objectively assess pain in these individuals. Neuroimaging techniques combined with machine learning are seen as possible candidates for the identification of pain biomarkers. This review aimed to address the potential use of electroencephalographic features as predictors of acute experimental pain. Twenty-six studies using only thermal stimulations were identified using a PubMed and Scopus search. Combinations of the following terms were used: "EEG," "Electroencephalography," "Acute," "Pain," "Tonic," "Noxious," "Thermal," "Stimulation," "Brain," "Activity," "Cold," "Subjective," and "Perception." Results revealed that contact-heat-evoked potentials have been widely recorded over central areas during noxious heat stimulations. Furthermore, a decrease in alpha power over central regions was revealed, as well as increased theta and gamma powers over frontal areas. Gamma and theta rhythms were associated with connectivity between sensory and affective regions involved in pain processing. A machine learning analysis revealed that the gamma band is a predominant predictor of acute thermal pain. This review also addressed the need of supplementing current spectral features with techniques that allow the investigation of network dynamics.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".