Cited by 263Pain Management and Placebo EffectPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsPain Management and Treatment

A functional magnetic resonance imaging study on the neural mechanisms of hyperalgesic nocebo effect

Open access
Kong, Jian, Gollub, Randy L., Polich, Ginger, Kirsch, Irving, LaViolette, Peter, Vangel, Mark, Rosen, Bruce, Kaptchuk, Ted J.·2008·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Previous studies suggest that nocebo effects, sometimes termed “negative placebo effects,” can contribute appreciably to a variety of medical symptoms and adverse events in clinical trials and medical care. In this study, using a within-subject design, we combined functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and an expectation/conditioning manipulation model to investigate the neural substrates of nocebo hyperalgesia using heat pain on the right forearm. Thirteen subjects completed the study. Results showed that, after administering inert treatment, subjective pain intensity ratings increased significantly more on nocebo regions compared with the control regions in which no expectancy/conditioning manipulation was performed. fMRI analysis of hyperalgesic nocebo responses to identical calibrated noxious stimuli showed signal increases in brain regions including bilateral dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), insula, superior temporal gyrus; left frontal and parietal operculum, medial frontal gyrus, orbital prefrontal cortex, superior parietal lobule, and hippocampus; right claustrum/putamen, lateral prefrontal gyrus, and middle temporal gyrus. Functional connectivity analysis of spontaneous resting-state fMRI data from the same cohort of subjects showed a correlation between two seed regions (left frontal operculum and hippocampus) and pain network including bilateral insula, operculum, ACC, and left S1/M1. In conclusion, we found evidence that nocebo hyperalgesia may be predominantly produced through an affective–cognitive pain pathway (medial pain system), and the left hippocampus may play an important role in this process.

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 · 10.1523/jneurosci.2944-08.2008

Cites

59 of 59 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?

  • Previous neuroimaging studies have shown that nocebo effects are mediated by the hippocampus and regions involved in anticipatory anxiety processing.

    “Previous neuroimaging studies have also shown that nocebo effects are mediated by the hippocampus and regions involved in anticipatory anxiety processing (Bingel et al., 2011; Kong et al., 2008; Ploghaus et al., 2001).”

    From Distinct neural representations of placebo and nocebo effects (2015) · cites this paper as Kong et al., 2008

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kong, J., Gollub, R. L., Polich, G., Kirsch, I., LaViolette, P., Vangel, M., Rosen, B., & Kaptchuk, T. J.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Massachusetts General Hospital (US)
  • University of Hull (GB)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2008-12-03
Volume
28
Issue
49
Pages
13354-13362
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2143071887
Cited by
263
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 23 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 19
FWCI
7.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (RR14075)
  • National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine
  • National Center for Research Resources (RR 14075, M01RR001066, P41RR014075)
  • National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (K24AT004095, R21AT001922, R21AT000949, P01AT002048, K01AT003883)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Pain Management and Placebo Effect
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
Keywords
nocebo effect, hyperalgesia, thermal pain, pain anticipation, dorsal anterior cingulate cortex, insula, hippocampus, frontal operculum, resting-state functional connectivity, pain network
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain, Brain Mapping, Cognition, Conditioning, Psychological, Female, Hippocampus, Humans, Hyperalgesia, Illusions, Functional Laterality, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Nerve Net, Neuropsychological Tests, Pain, Pain Measurement, Physical Stimulation, Placebo Effect, Pain Threshold, Young Adult

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