Cited by 200Pain Mechanisms and TreatmentsPain Management and Placebo EffectPain Management and Treatment

Decoding the perception of pain from fMRI using multivariate pattern analysis

Open access
Brodersen, Kay H., Wiech, Katja, Lomakina, Ekaterina I., Lin, Chia-shu, Buhmann, Joachim M., Bingel, Ulrike, Ploner, Markus, Stephan, Klaas Enno +1 more·2012·NeuroImage

Abstract

Pain is known to comprise sensory, cognitive, and affective aspects. Despite numerous previous fMRI studies, however, it remains open which spatial distribution of activity is sufficient to encode whether a stimulus is perceived as painful or not. In this study, we analyzed fMRI data from a perceptual decision-making task in which participants were exposed to near-threshold laser pulses. Using multivariate analyses on different spatial scales, we investigated the predictive capacity of fMRI data for decoding whether a stimulus had been perceived as painful. Our analysis yielded a rank order of brain regions: during pain anticipation, activity in the periaqueductal gray (PAG) and orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) afforded the most accurate trial-by-trial discrimination between painful and non-painful experiences; whereas during the actual stimulation, primary and secondary somatosensory cortex, anterior insula, dorsolateral and ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, and OFC were most discriminative. The most accurate prediction of pain perception from the stimulation period, however, was enabled by the combined activity in pain regions commonly referred to as the 'pain matrix'. Our results demonstrate that the neural representation of (near-threshold) pain is spatially distributed and can be best described at an intermediate spatial scale. In addition to its utility in establishing structure-function mappings, our approach affords trial-by-trial predictions and thus represents a step towards the goal of establishing an objective neuronal marker of pain perception.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.08.035

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Activity in the PAG and OFC has often been related to processing of anxiety associated with anticipating nociceptive stimuli.

    “The activity in the PAG and the OFC has also been often related to the processing of anxiety associated with anticipating nociceptive stimuli (Brodersen et al., 2012; Fairhurst et al., 2007).”

    From Distinct neural representations of placebo and nocebo effects (2015) · cites this paper as Brodersen et al., 2012

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 36 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brodersen, K. H., Wiech, K., Lomakina, E. I., Lin, C.-S., Buhmann, J. M., Bingel, U., Ploner, M., Stephan, K. E., & Tracey, I.
Affiliations
  • University of Zurich (CH)
  • John Radcliffe Hospital (GB)
  • ETH Zurich (CH)
  • Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging (GB)
Corresponding author
  • Brodersen, Kay H.
  • Wiech, Katja
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-11
Volume
63
Issue
3
Pages
1162-1170
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2037272682
Cited by
200
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 1
FWCI
11.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • Repository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Universitätsbibliographie, Universität Duisburg-Essen (submittedVersion)
  • mediaTUM (Technical University of Munich) (submittedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • ETH Zürich Research Collection
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (FMRIB Centre and IT)
  • NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre (KW)
  • University Research Priority Program ‘Foundations of Human Social Behaviour’ at the University of Zurich (KHB, KES)
  • SystemsX.ch project ‘Neurochoice’ (KHB, KES)
  • NCCR ‘Neural Plasticity’ (KES)
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 perception, pain matrix, multivariate pattern analysis, periaqueductal gray, orbitofrontal cortex, anterior insula, somatosensory cortex, prefrontal cortex, pain anticipation
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain, Brain Mapping, Female, Humans, Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Young Adult, Pain Perception

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