Cited by 9Multiple Sclerosis Research StudiesPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation

Risk factors of neuropathic pain in multiple sclerosis: a retrospective case-cohort study

Open access
Ouyang, Huiying, Li, Xiaojun, Xu, Haoyou, Zhan, Yibo, Zheng, Zequan, Chen, Guixian, Lou, Zhenzhen, Chen, Haoxuan +6 more·2024·Frontiers in Immunology

Abstract

Background: Pain is a common symptom in multiple sclerosis (MS), especially neuropathic pain, which has a significant impact on patients’ mental and physical health and quality of life. However, risk factors that related to neuropathic pain, still remain unclear. Objective: The study aimed to explore the risk factors of neuropathic pain among MS patients. Materials and methods: This retrospective study examined the consecutive patients diagnosed with MS in the Department of Neurology of Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine between August 2011 and October 2022. Neuropathic pain was defined as “pain arising as a direct consequence of a lesion or disease affecting the somatosensory system”. Demographic and clinical features were obtained from the electronic system of the hospital. Results: Our cohort revealed that the prevalence of patients with neuropathic pain in MS was 34.1%. The results indicated that the longer the spinal lesions, the greater the neuropathic pain risks (2-4: OR, 13.3(2.1-82), >5: OR, 15.2(2.7-86.8), p for tread: 0.037). Meanwhile, multivariate regression analysis showed that cervical and thoracic lesions (OR 4.276, 95% CI 1.366-13.382, P = 0.013), upper thoracic lesions (T1-T6) (OR 3.047, 95% CI 1.018-9.124, P = 0.046) were positively correlated with neuropathic pain, while basal ganglia lesions (OR 0.188, 95% CI 0.044-0.809, P = 0.025) were negatively correlated with neuropathic pain among MS patients. Conclusion: Extended spinal lesions (≥3 spinal lesions), cervical and thoracic lesions, upper thoracic lesions were independent risk factors of neuropathic pain among MS patients. Furthermore, our study found that the longer the spinal lesions, the greater the neuropathic pain risks.

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 · 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1309583

Cites

40 of 40 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?

  • Determining whether lesions are neuroanatomically plausible for explaining pain in multiple sclerosis is complex, as the correlation between lesion location and pain is at best moderate-to-good.

    “However, determining whether lesions are neuroanatomically plausible for explaining pain in MS is complex, as the correlation between lesion location and pain is at best moderate‐to‐good (Ismail et al. 2025; Ouyang et al. 2024; Seixas et al. 2014; Svendsen et al. 2011).”

    From The Prevalence of Neuropathic Pain in Multiple Sclerosis—A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis Using the <scp>NeuPSIG</scp> Algorithm (2026) · cites this paper as Ouyang et al. 2024

    The Discussion (page unavailable) describes the association between spinal cord lesions and neuropathic pain as controversial and reports that this study did not find the expected associations for thalamic or parietal lesions. That supports the difficulty of interpreting lesion location, but the paper does not characterize the overall lesion-location–pain correlation as “at best moderate-to-good.” (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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
Ouyang, H., Li, X., Xu, H., Zhan, Y., Zheng, Z., Chen, G., Lou, Z., Chen, H., Zhang, J., Mao, H., Zhang, C., Qin, L., Zhao, Y., & Zhao, M.
Affiliations
Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine (CN)
Corresponding author
  • Zhao, Yuanqi
  • Zhao, Min
Venue
Frontiers in Immunology
Published
2024-01-29
Volume
15
Pages
1309583-1309583
ISSN
1664-3224 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4391320611
Cited by
9
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3
FWCI
2.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Immunology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Traditional Chinese Medicine Bureau of Guangdong Province
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Multiple Sclerosis Research Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Keywords
multiple sclerosis, neuropathic pain, risk factors, spinal lesions, cervical lesions, thoracic lesions, basal ganglia lesions, pain prevalence
MeSH terms
Humans, Multiple Sclerosis, Neuralgia, Quality of Life, Retrospective Studies, Risk Factors, Cohort Studies

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