MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4292470367 · doi:10.3389/fpain.2022.943360

Improvement of pain experience and changes in heart rate variability through music-imaginative pain treatment

2022· article· en· W4292470367 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Susanne Metzner, Marc N. Jarczok, Irina Böckelmann, Sina Glomb, Manuela Delhey, Harald Gündel, Jörg Frommer

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Pain Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMusic Therapy and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeart rate variabilityMcGill Pain QuestionnaireChronic painMusic therapyHeart ratePhysical therapyPsychologyMedicineClinical psychologyBlood pressureInternal medicineVisual analogue scale

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Music-imaginative Pain Treatment (MIPT) is a form of music therapy addressing pain experience and affective attitudes toward pain. It includes two self-composed music pieces: one dedicated to the pain experience (pain music, PM) and the other to healing imagination (healing music, HM). Our non-experimental study addresses patients with chronic somatoform pain disorders participating in MIPT. The goal is to gain insight into the direct effect mechanisms of MIPT by combining outcome measures on both the objective physiological and subjective perception levels. The research questions are directed toward changes in pain experience and heart rate variability and their correlations. Thirty-seven hospitalized patients with chronic or somatoform pain disorders receiving MIPT participated in this study. Demographic data and psychometric measures (Symptom Check List SCL90, Childhood Trauma Questionnaire CTQ) were collected to characterize the sample. Subjective pain experience was measured by McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), and Heart Rate Variability by 24 h-ECG. Data analysis shows a reduction of reported pain from MT1 = 19.1 (SD = 7.3) to MT2 = 10.6 (SD = 8.0) in all dimensions of the SF-MPQ. HRV analyses shows a reduced absolute power during PM and HM, while a relative shift in the autonomic system toward higher vagal activity appears during HM. Significant correlations between HRV and MPQ could not be calculated. Findings are interpreted as a physiological correlate to the psychological processes of the patients. Future studies with more participants, a control-group design, and the integration of medium- and long-term effects are recommended.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.105
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.316 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Pain ResearchSame topicMusic Therapy and HealthFrench-language works237,207