Cited by 38Pain Management and TreatmentNeurological disorders and treatmentsPain Management and Placebo Effect

Subjective estimates of chronic pain before and after psychosurgery or treatment in a pain unit

Corkin, S., Hebben, N.·1981·Pain

Abstract

Department of Psychology and Clinical Research Center, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0304-3959(81)90390-0

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?

  • After anterior cingulum lesions for chronic pain, patients continue to experience pain but perceive it as less distressing or less worrying.

    “Patients are reported as continuing to experience pain but to perceive it as less distressing or less worrying (Foltz and White, 1962; Corkin and Hebben, 1981)”

    From The cingulum bundle: Anatomy, function, and dysfunction (2018) · cites this paper as Corkin and Hebben, 1981

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Corkin, S., & Hebben, N.
Affiliations
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
Venue
Pain
Published
1981
Volume
11
Pages
S150
ISSN
0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1988149706
Cited by
38
References
0
Citations by year
2024: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2
FWCI
0.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Pain (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Neurological disorders and treatments
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Pain Management and Placebo Effect
Keywords
chronic pain, psychosurgery, pain assessment, pain units, pain treatment outcomes

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