Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 172

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effects of Rate on Analgesia in Kilohertz Frequency Spinal Cord Stimulation: Results of the PROCO Randomized Controlled Trial

Open access
Thomson, Simon J., Tavakkolizadeh, Moein, Love-Jones, Sarah, Patel, Nikunj K., Gu, Jianwen Wendy, Bains, Amarpreet, Doan, Que, Moffitt, Michael·2018·Neuromodulation: Technology at the Neural Interface

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The PROCO RCT is a multicenter, double-blind, crossover, randomized controlled trial (RCT) that investigated the effects of rate on analgesia in kilohertz frequency (1-10 kHz) spinal cord stimulation (SCS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were implanted with SCS systems and underwent an eight-week search to identify the best location ("sweet spot") of stimulation at 10 kHz within the searched region (T8-T11). An electronic diary (e-diary) prompted patients for pain scores three times per day. Patients who responded to 10 kHz per e-diary numeric rating scale (ED-NRS) pain scores proceeded to double-blind rate randomization. Patients received 1, 4, 7, and 10 kHz SCS at the same sweet spot found for 10 kHz in randomized order (four weeks at each frequency). For each frequency, pulse width and amplitude were titrated to optimize therapy. RESULTS: All frequencies provided equivalent pain relief as measured by ED-NRS (p ≤ 0.002). However, mean charge per second differed across frequencies, with 1 kHz SCS requiring 60-70% less charge than higher frequencies (p ≤ 0.0002). CONCLUSIONS: The PROCO RCT provides Level I evidence for equivalent pain relief from 1 to 10 kHz with appropriate titration of pulse width and amplitude. 1 kHz required significantly less charge than higher frequencies.

Overview

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 · 10.1111/ner.12746

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 7 references

Cited by

See all 172

Metadata

Authors
Thomson, S. J., Tavakkolizadeh, M., Love-Jones, S., Patel, N. K., Gu, J. W., Bains, A., Doan, Q., & Moffitt, M.
Venue
Neuromodulation: Technology at the Neural Interface
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-01
Volume
21
Issue
1
Pages
67-76
ISSN
1094-7159 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2773756920
Cited by
172
References
7
FWCI
26.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Effects of Rate on Analgesia in Kilohertz Frequency Spinal Cord Stimulation: Results of the PROCO Randomized Controlled Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/ner.12746
The paper
Thomson, S. J., Tavakkolizadeh, M., Love-Jones, S., Patel, N. K., Gu, J. W., Bains, A., Doan, Q., & Moffitt, M. (2018). Effects of Rate on Analgesia in Kilohertz Frequency Spinal Cord Stimulation: Results of the PROCO Randomized Controlled Trial. Neuromodulation: Technology at the Neural Interface. https://doi.org/10.1111/ner.12746

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.