Preliminary study: quantification of chronic pain from physiological data.

IF 3.4 Q2 NEUROSCIENCES
Pain Reports Pub Date : 2022-10-04 eCollection Date: 2022-11-01 DOI:10.1097/PR9.0000000000001039
Zhuowei Cheng, Franklin Ly, Tyler Santander, Elyes Turki, Yun Zhao, Jamie Yoo, Kian Lonergan, Jordan Gray, Christopher H Li, Henry Yang, Michael Miller, Paul Hansma, Linda Petzold
{"title":"Preliminary study: quantification of chronic pain from physiological data.","authors":"Zhuowei Cheng,&nbsp;Franklin Ly,&nbsp;Tyler Santander,&nbsp;Elyes Turki,&nbsp;Yun Zhao,&nbsp;Jamie Yoo,&nbsp;Kian Lonergan,&nbsp;Jordan Gray,&nbsp;Christopher H Li,&nbsp;Henry Yang,&nbsp;Michael Miller,&nbsp;Paul Hansma,&nbsp;Linda Petzold","doi":"10.1097/PR9.0000000000001039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>It is unknown if physiological changes associated with chronic pain could be measured with inexpensive physiological sensors. Recently, acute pain and laboratory-induced pain have been quantified with physiological sensors.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To investigate the extent to which chronic pain can be quantified with physiological sensors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data were collected from chronic pain sufferers who subjectively rated their pain on a 0 to 10 visual analogue scale, using our recently developed pain meter. Physiological variables, including pulse, temperature, and motion signals, were measured at head, neck, wrist, and finger with multiple sensors. To quantify pain, features were first extracted from 10-second windows. Linear models with recursive feature elimination were fit for each subject. A random forest regression model was used for pain score prediction for the population-level model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Predictive performance was assessed using leave-one-recording-out cross-validation and nonparametric permutation testing. For individual-level models, 5 of 12 subjects yielded intraclass correlation coefficients between actual and predicted pain scores of 0.46 to 0.75. For the population-level model, the random forest method yielded an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.58. Bland-Altman analysis shows that our model tends to overestimate the lower end of the pain scores and underestimate the higher end.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This is the first demonstration that physiological data can be correlated with chronic pain, both for individuals and populations. Further research and more extensive data will be required to assess whether this approach could be used as a \"chronic pain meter\" to assess the level of chronic pain in patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":52189,"journal":{"name":"Pain Reports","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9534370/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PR9.0000000000001039","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/11/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: It is unknown if physiological changes associated with chronic pain could be measured with inexpensive physiological sensors. Recently, acute pain and laboratory-induced pain have been quantified with physiological sensors.

Objectives: To investigate the extent to which chronic pain can be quantified with physiological sensors.

Methods: Data were collected from chronic pain sufferers who subjectively rated their pain on a 0 to 10 visual analogue scale, using our recently developed pain meter. Physiological variables, including pulse, temperature, and motion signals, were measured at head, neck, wrist, and finger with multiple sensors. To quantify pain, features were first extracted from 10-second windows. Linear models with recursive feature elimination were fit for each subject. A random forest regression model was used for pain score prediction for the population-level model.

Results: Predictive performance was assessed using leave-one-recording-out cross-validation and nonparametric permutation testing. For individual-level models, 5 of 12 subjects yielded intraclass correlation coefficients between actual and predicted pain scores of 0.46 to 0.75. For the population-level model, the random forest method yielded an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.58. Bland-Altman analysis shows that our model tends to overestimate the lower end of the pain scores and underestimate the higher end.

Conclusion: This is the first demonstration that physiological data can be correlated with chronic pain, both for individuals and populations. Further research and more extensive data will be required to assess whether this approach could be used as a "chronic pain meter" to assess the level of chronic pain in patients.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

初步研究:从生理数据量化慢性疼痛。
目前尚不清楚与慢性疼痛相关的生理变化是否可以用廉价的生理传感器来测量。近年来,急性疼痛和实验室诱发的疼痛已被生理传感器量化。目的:探讨生理传感器对慢性疼痛的量化程度。方法:使用我们最新开发的疼痛量表,收集慢性疼痛患者的数据,他们主观地将自己的疼痛评定为0到10的视觉模拟等级。用多个传感器测量头部、颈部、手腕和手指的脉搏、体温和运动信号等生理变量。为了量化疼痛,首先从10秒窗口中提取特征。采用递归特征消去的线性模型对每个受试者进行拟合。采用随机森林回归模型对人群水平模型进行疼痛评分预测。结果:使用留一记录交叉验证和非参数排列检验评估预测性能。对于个体水平模型,12名受试者中有5人的实际疼痛评分与预测疼痛评分之间的类内相关系数为0.46至0.75。对于种群水平模型,随机森林方法的类内相关系数为0.58。Bland-Altman分析表明,我们的模型倾向于高估疼痛评分的低端,而低估高端。结论:这是首次证明生理数据可以与慢性疼痛相关,无论是个人还是群体。需要进一步的研究和更广泛的数据来评估这种方法是否可以作为“慢性疼痛计”来评估患者的慢性疼痛水平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Pain Reports
Pain Reports Medicine-Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
2.10%
发文量
93
审稿时长
8 weeks
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信