Cited by 214Pain Mechanisms and TreatmentsPain Management and Placebo EffectPain Management and Treatment

Effects of catastrophizing on pain perception and pain modulation

Weissman-Fogel, Irit, Sprecher, Elliot, Pud, Dorit·2008·Experimental Brain Research

Abstract

The multidimensional experience of pain is thought to be partially influenced by the pain modulation system as well as by individual psychological components. Recent studies demonstrated possible common neural network mediating both domains. The present study examined the relationships between pain perception, pain modulation, and catastrophizing in healthy subjects. Forty-eight participants (29 females and 19 males) completed the pain catastrophizing scale (PCS) and underwent psychophysical tests in order to evaluate the modulation of pain, using the diffuse noxious inhibitory control (DNIC) paradigm. Contact heat pain (47.0 degrees C applied for 1 min), which was used as the "test" stimulation, was applied before and after a physical effort that induces pain (repeated squeezing of a hand grip device), which was used as a "conditioning" stimulus. Numeric pain scale intensities (NPS, 0-10) were evaluated four times during each of two separate consecutive runs of heat stimulation. Results showed a significant positive correlation of PCS with heat pain (r = 0.48, p < 0.0005) and with muscle pain (r = 0.31, p = 0.03). In addition, significant negative correlations were found between PCS and DNIC effect (r = -0.34, p = 0.02). Moreover, once catastrophizing was entered into the regression analysis, the previously significant effect of gender was no longer found. In conclusion, individuals with high catastrophizing levels demonstrated higher pain intensities and lower effects of DNIC indicating that catastrophizing might have a significant impact on pain perception via an association with pain modulation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00221-007-1206-7

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 60 · Cited by 214

Authors
Weissman-Fogel, I., Sprecher, E., & Pud, D.
Affiliations
  • Rambam Health Care Campus (IL)
  • University of Haifa (IL)
Corresponding author
Pud, Dorit
Venue
Experimental Brain Research
Published
2007-11-21
Volume
186
Issue
1
Pages
79-85
ISSN
  • 0014-4819 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1106
OpenAlex
W2104638265
Cited by
214
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 17
FWCI
4.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Experimental Brain Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Pain Management and Placebo Effect
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
Keywords
pain catastrophizing, pain perception, pain modulation, diffuse noxious inhibitory control, myalgia, Pain Catastrophizing Scale, gender differences, psychophysical pain assessment
MeSH terms
Adult, Physical Exertion, Female, Hot Temperature, Humans, Male, Nerve Net, Pain, Pain Measurement, Perception, Reference Values, Muscle, Skeletal, Patient Selection

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review