Cited by 265Pain Mechanisms and TreatmentsPain Management and Placebo EffectPain Management and Treatment

Gender differences in pain modulation by diffuse noxious inhibitory controls: a systematic review

Popescu, Adriana, LeResche, Linda, Truelove, Edmond L., Drangsholt, Mark T.·2010·Pain

Abstract

Over the last decade, extensive research has demonstrated sex differences in pain perception and modulation. Several factors have been proposed to account for the differences observed between men and women, including pain modulation through diffuse noxious inhibitory controls (DNIC). Studies investigating sex differences in DNIC have shown mixed results, with some reporting decreased DNIC effect in women compared with men, while others found no difference in DNIC between the sexes. Additional studies have investigated DNIC in both sexes without focusing on sex differences. This systematic review aimed to answer the following question: "In humans of reproductive age without chronic pain, are women more likely than men to have decreased Diffuse Noxious Inhibitory Controls?" Relevant studies were identified by computerized searches of Pubmed/Medline, Embase, Biosis, Web of Science, PsycInfo and Cochrane (from January 1980 through February 2009). The search was limited to human studies with no language restriction. The initial search identified 718 titles and abstracts. Seventeen studies were included in the final stage and data regarding age and gender of participants, methodology and outcome measurements were extracted and analyzed. The majority of studies using pain report as the outcome found significantly more efficient DNIC in males than females (mean female/male ratio=0.54). Studies evaluating pain thresholds and nociceptive flexion reflex indicated the opposite when simply averaged across studies; however, weighted analyses of threshold found more efficient DNIC in males. Gender differences in DNIC effect depend on both the experimental methodology and the modes of measurement of the effect.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.pain.2010.05.013

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Popescu, A., LeResche, L., Truelove, E. L., & Drangsholt, M. T.
Affiliations
University of Washington (US)
Corresponding author
LeResche, Linda
Venue
Pain
Published
2010-08
Volume
150
Issue
2
Pages
309-318
ISSN
0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2020359426
Cited by
265
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 35 · 2012: 15
FWCI
2.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Pain (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
diffuse noxious inhibitory control, sex differences, pain modulation, pain perception, nociceptive flexion reflex, pain threshold, women, men, sex differences in pain
MeSH terms
Female, Humans, Male, Neural Inhibition, Neurons, Pain, Sex Characteristics, Pain Threshold

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