Resting-state electroencephalography (EEG) biomarkers of chronic neuropathic pain. A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diagnosis and management of chronic neuropathic pain are challenging, leading to current efforts to characterize 'objective' biomarkers of pain using imaging or neurophysiological techniques, such as electroencephalography (EEG). A systematic literature review was conducted in PubMed-Medline and Web-of-Science until October 2021 to identify EEG biomarkers of chronic neuropathic pain in humans. The risk of bias was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa-Scale. Experimental, provoked, or chronic non-neuropathic pain studies were excluded. We identified 14 studies, in which resting-state EEG spectral analysis was compared between patients with pain related to a neurological disease and patients with the same disease but without pain or healthy controls. From these heterogeneous exploratory studies, some conclusions can be drawn, even if they must be weighted by the fact that confounding factors, such as medication and association with anxio-depressive disorders, are generally not taken into account. Overall, EEG signal power was increased in the θ band (4-7Hz) and possibly in the high-β band (20-30Hz), but decreased in the high-α-low-β band (10-20Hz) in the presence of ongoing neuropathic pain, while increased γ band oscillations were not evidenced, unlike in experimental pain. Consequently, the dominant peak frequency was decreased in the θ-α band and increased in the whole-β band in neuropathic pain patients. Disappointingly, pain intensity correlated with various EEG changes across studies, with no consistent trend. This review also discusses the location of regional pain-related EEG changes in the pain connectome, as the perspectives offered by advanced techniques of EEG signal analysis (source location, connectivity, or classification methods based on artificial intelligence). The biomarkers provided by resting-state EEG are of particular interest for optimizing the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain by neuromodulation techniques, such as transcranial alternating current stimulation or neurofeedback procedures.
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 | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".