FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2945558788> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2945558788 endingPage "1486" @default.
• W2945558788 startingPage "1485" @default.
• W2945558788 abstract "Letter to Editor: We appreciate the letter by Zaman et al.16 in response to our recent article.11 The principal objective of our article11 was to evaluate whether psychological processes such as appraisal mediate the effects of temperature on autonomic responses, or whether autonomic arousal in response to noxious heat is purely reflexive, as proposed by the IASP definition7—a goal which we assert multiple times (eg, Introduction11). We feel that this question is more fundamental than the related, but secondary, question of directionality between pain and autonomic responses, on which Zaman et al.16 focus. The letter also highlights 2 important points that were discussed explicitly in our Discussion11: (1) caveats to correlational mediation and (2) the influence of psychological factors on pain and pain-evoked autonomic responses. Thus, although there are many points of agreement, Zaman et al. have unfortunately mischaracterized the central goal of our work. We agree that mediation analysis is not sufficient to establish causality, as has been discussed extensively in statistics, experimental psychology, and related fields.4,8,9,13–15 In the dominant approach to mediation, researchers test the association of a manipulated or measured proposed causal variable with a putative effect variable and test whether a measured mediator variable statistically accounts for this association. Ideally, the mediator would then be experimentally manipulated to establish a causal mechanism.13 In our Discussion,11 we propose that future investigations use pharmacological interventions to modulate pain and test whether intensity effects on autonomic responses are abolished. This would supplement and extend our statistical mediation and indicate causality. A similar approach (ie, pharmacological modulation of pain vs sympathetic nervous system activity) could formally test the somatic marker hypothesis5 and questions of directionality between pain and autonomic responses raised by Zaman et al.16 When a mediator is measured and not manipulated, this approach is limited and can be prone to alternative explanations, as discussed by Zaman et al.16: (1) reversed or reciprocal relationships between the mediator and other variables in the mediation model8,9,14 and (2) confounding third variables that may account for correlations between variables in the mediation model.4,6,10 We agree with Zaman et al. that our research on the role of pain in heat effects on autonomic responses is limited in its ability to definitely reveal causal conclusions about pain as a mediator. This is why we extensively discussed limitations and offered experimental solutions in our Discussion.11 However, we disagree with Zaman et al.'s suggestion that we misuse the term “mediation.” Zaman et al. postulate that time precedence, ie, measuring the proposed mediator before the proposed dependent variable is a sine qua non condition for labeling a variable as mediator.8 Because we had to measure pain after the autonomic response, we supposedly violated this labeling standard. However, even time precedence in measuring the proposed cause (X) before the proposed effect (Y) does not rule out the possibility of a reversed causal relationship. Two pages after the quote that served as the core argument of Zaman et al.'s objection, Kline8 (p. 207) adds, “time precedence is no guarantee […] because X could have been affected by Y before either variable was actually measured in a longitudinal study.” In other words, measurement order in mediation analysis allows only limited conclusions about the direction of underlying causal relationships. We have previously dealt with this concern in another article that used multilevel mediation analysis to measure the neural mediators of cue-based expectations on subjective pain.1 Although we asked participants in that study about their pain after heat offset, participants might have reflected on ratings before they were explicitly asked, and introspection might have led to brain activation. We reversed mediator and effect variables and found no evidence of mediation, supporting our directional path analyses. Prompted by Zaman et al.'s letter, we now present the same analysis for our recent study.11 Testing both tasks and outcome measures, we compared our original path model (temperature → pain → autonomic nervous system response) with the alternative model (temperature → autonomic nervous system → pain). We find evidence for mediation in both models (Table 1). However, our original model accounts for larger reductions in direct effects than the alternative model. In our original model, pain mediates a substantial amount of the effect of temperature on skin conductance response. By contrast, in the alternative model, autonomic responses account for hardly any variance in the direct effect of temperature on pain, which suggests a direct and strong effect of temperature on pain that autonomic responses are not able to account for. However, we refrain taking too much stock in these findings because of the limitations of model comparison with alternative mediation models,9,14 as discussed by Zaman et al.Table 1: Original and alternative mediation models.Finally, we concur wholeheartedly that expectation, attention, and anxiety1,3,12 can cause variations in pain and physiological arousal beyond the pure effects of temperature, as we discussed.11 In previous work, we directly manipulated and measured the influence of such factors on pain and skin conductance.1,2 However, we believe these processes simply serve as additional links in our proposed causal chain rather than as confounding third variables. Most importantly, we believe that the directional model and our use of mediation analysis to test this model are defensible because we start with a theoretically strong, a priori, research question, specifically whether or not conscious pain appraisal contributes to the effects of noxious input on autonomic responses. Mediation analysis enables us to make judgments about these possibilities and suggests that pain appraisal does account for variance in this relationship. Although our study was not designed to isolate additional psychological processes that contribute to pain, and our results alone cannot preclude the possibility of reversed or reciprocal associations between pain and autonomic arousal, our work links arousal more closely with pain than nociception and isolates important candidates for targeted interventions in the future. Conflict of interest statement The authors have no conflict of interest to declare." @default.
• W2945558788 created "2019-05-29" @default.
• W2945558788 creator A5025943582 @default.
• W2945558788 creator A5041962211 @default.
• W2945558788 date "2019-06-01" @default.
• W2945558788 modified "2023-10-14" @default.
• W2945558788 title "Reply to Zaman et al." @default.
• W2945558788 cites W1715619412 @default.
• W2945558788 cites W1828259239 @default.
• W2945558788 cites W2008961184 @default.
• W2945558788 cites W2033011965 @default.
• W2945558788 cites W2094429807 @default.
• W2945558788 cites W2114385529 @default.
• W2945558788 cites W2151651036 @default.
• W2945558788 cites W2155450807 @default.
• W2945558788 cites W2287953354 @default.
• W2945558788 cites W2389372669 @default.
• W2945558788 cites W2410274842 @default.
• W2945558788 cites W2772828145 @default.
• W2945558788 cites W2945725950 @default.
• W2945558788 cites W3124634669 @default.
• W2945558788 doi "https://doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001572" @default.
• W2945558788 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/6553954" @default.
• W2945558788 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31107419" @default.
• W2945558788 hasPublicationYear "2019" @default.
• W2945558788 type Work @default.
• W2945558788 sameAs 2945558788 @default.
• W2945558788 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W2945558788 countsByYear W29455587882021 @default.
• W2945558788 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2945558788 hasAuthorship W2945558788A5025943582 @default.
• W2945558788 hasAuthorship W2945558788A5041962211 @default.
• W2945558788 hasBestOaLocation W29455587882 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConcept C104211972 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConcept C142724271 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConcept C142853389 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConcept C151730666 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConcept C15490471 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConcept C169760540 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConcept C170493617 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConcept C179420905 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConcept C180747234 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConcept C204787440 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConcept C2777267654 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConcept C36951298 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConcept C514803892 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConcept C542102704 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConcept C62520636 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConcept C64357122 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConcept C89611455 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConceptScore W2945558788C104211972 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConceptScore W2945558788C111472728 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConceptScore W2945558788C121332964 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConceptScore W2945558788C126322002 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConceptScore W2945558788C138885662 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConceptScore W2945558788C142724271 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConceptScore W2945558788C142853389 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConceptScore W2945558788C151730666 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConceptScore W2945558788C15490471 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConceptScore W2945558788C15744967 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConceptScore W2945558788C169760540 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConceptScore W2945558788C170493617 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConceptScore W2945558788C17744445 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConceptScore W2945558788C179420905 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConceptScore W2945558788C180747234 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConceptScore W2945558788C199539241 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConceptScore W2945558788C204787440 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConceptScore W2945558788C2777267654 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConceptScore W2945558788C36951298 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConceptScore W2945558788C514803892 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConceptScore W2945558788C542102704 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConceptScore W2945558788C62520636 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConceptScore W2945558788C64357122 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConceptScore W2945558788C71924100 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConceptScore W2945558788C86803240 @default.
• W2945558788 hasConceptScore W2945558788C89611455 @default.
• W2945558788 hasIssue "6" @default.
• W2945558788 hasLocation W29455587881 @default.
• W2945558788 hasLocation W29455587882 @default.
• W2945558788 hasLocation W29455587883 @default.
• W2945558788 hasLocation W29455587884 @default.
• W2945558788 hasOpenAccess W2945558788 @default.
• W2945558788 hasPrimaryLocation W29455587881 @default.
• W2945558788 hasRelatedWork W1481308561 @default.
• W2945558788 hasRelatedWork W1983478236 @default.
• W2945558788 hasRelatedWork W1987330579 @default.
• W2945558788 hasRelatedWork W1989265566 @default.
• W2945558788 hasRelatedWork W2023762087 @default.
• W2945558788 hasRelatedWork W2029436577 @default.

• next