Magnetoencephalography reveals increased slow-to-fast alpha power ratios in patients with chronic pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction: Objective disease markers are a key for diagnosis and personalized interventions. In chronic pain, such markers are still not available, and therapy relies on individual patients' reports. However, several pain studies have reported group-based differences in functional magnetic resonance imaging, electroencephalography, and magnetoencephalography (MEG). Objectives: We aimed to explore spectral differences in resting-state MEG brain signals between patients with chronic pain and pain-free controls and to characterize the cortical and subcortical regions involved. Methods: We estimated power spectral density over 5 minutes of resting-state MEG recordings in patients with chronic pain and controls and derived 7 spectral features at the sensor and source levels: alpha peak frequency, alpha power ratio (power 7–9 Hz divided by power 9–11 Hz), and average power in theta, alpha, beta, low-gamma, and high-gamma bands. We performed nonparametric permutation t tests (false discovery rate corrected) to assess between-group differences in these 7 spectral features. Results: Twenty-one patients with chronic pain and 25 controls were included. No significant group differences were found in alpha peak frequency or average power in any frequency band. The alpha power ratio was significantly higher (P < 0.05) in patients with chronic pain at both the sensor and brain source levels. The brain regions showing significantly higher ratios included the occipital, parietal, temporal and frontal lobe areas, insular and cingulate cortex, and right thalamus. Conclusion: The alpha power ratio is a simple, promising signal marker of chronic pain, affecting an expansive range of cortical and subcortical regions, including known pain-processing areas.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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 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".