↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Endogenous inhibition of pain and spinal nociception in women with premenstrual dysphoric disorder

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain Research, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
Title
Endogenous inhibition of pain and spinal nociception in women with premenstrual dysphoric disorder
Published in
Journal of Pain Research, February 2016
DOI 10.2147/jpr.s97109
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shreela Palit, Emily J Bartley, Bethany L Kuhn, Kara L Kerr, Jennifer L DelVentura, Ellen L Terry, Jamie L Rhudy

Abstract

Premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD) is characterized by severe affective and physical symptoms, such as increased pain, during the late-luteal phase of the menstrual cycle. The mechanisms underlying hyperalgesia in women with PMDD have yet to be identified, and supraspinal pain modulation has yet to be examined in this population. The present study assessed endogenous pain inhibitory processing by examining conditioned pain modulation (CPM, a painful conditioning stimulus inhibiting pain evoked by a test stimulus at a distal body site) of pain and the nociceptive flexion reflex (NFR, a spinally-mediated withdrawal reflex) during the mid-follicular, ovulatory, and late-luteal phases of the menstrual cycle. Participants were regularly-cycling women (14 without PMDD; 14 with PMDD). CPM was assessed by delivering electrocutaneous test stimuli to the sural nerve before, during, and after a painful conditioning ischemia task. Participants rated their pain to electrocutaneous stimuli, and NFR magnitudes were measured. A linear mixed model analysis was used to assess the influence of group and menstrual phase on CPM. Compared with controls, women with PMDD experienced greater pain during the late-luteal phase and enhanced spinal nociception during the ovulation phase, both of which were independent of CPM. Both groups showed CPM inhibition of pain that did not differ by menstrual phase. Only women with PMDD evidenced CPM inhibition of NFR. Endogenous modulation of pain and spinal nociception is not disrupted in women with PMDD. Additionally, greater NFR magnitudes during ovulation in PMDD may be due to tonically-engaged descending mechanisms that facilitate spinal nociception, leading to enhanced pain during the premenstrual phase.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 30%
Researcher 6 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 17%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 4 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 7 23%
Psychology 7 23%
Neuroscience 2 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 7%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 8 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 November 2022.
All research outputs
#2,153,521
of 23,213,531 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#258
of 1,781 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,040
of 399,166 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#7
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,213,531 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,781 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 399,166 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.