↓ Skip to main content

A Novel Magnetic Stimulator Increases Experimental Pain Tolerance in Healthy Volunteers - A Double-Blind Sham-Controlled Crossover Study

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, April 2013
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 (84th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A Novel Magnetic Stimulator Increases Experimental Pain Tolerance in Healthy Volunteers - A Double-Blind Sham-Controlled Crossover Study
Published in
PLOS ONE, April 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0061926
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rudie Kortekaas, Lotte E. van Nierop, Veroni G. Baas, Karl-Heinz Konopka, Marten Harbers, Johannes H. van der Hoeven, Marten van Wijhe, André Aleman, Natasha M. Maurits

Abstract

The 'complex neural pulse'(TM) (CNP) is a neuromodulation protocol employing weak pulsed electromagnetic fields (PEMF). A pioneering paper reported an analgesic effect in healthy humans after 30 minutes of CNP-stimulation using three nested whole head coils. We aimed to devise and validate a stimulator with a novel design entailing a multitude of small coils at known anatomical positions on a head cap, to improve applicability. The main hypothesis was that CNP delivery with this novel device would also increase heat pain thresholds. Twenty healthy volunteers were enrolled in this double-blind, sham-controlled, crossover study. Thirty minutes of PEMF (CNP) or sham was applied to the head. After one week the other treatment was given. Before and after each treatment, primary and secondary outcomes were measured. Primary outcome was heat pain threshold (HPT) measured with thermal quantitative sensory testing. Other outcomes were warmth detection threshold, and aspects of cognition, emotion and motor performance. As hypothesized heat pain threshold was significantly increased after the PEMF stimulation. All other outcomes were unaltered by the PEMF but there was a trend level reduction of cognitive performance after PEMF stimulation as measured by the digit-symbol substitution task. Results from this pilot study suggest that our device is able to stimulate the brain and to modulate its function. This is in agreement with previous studies that used similar magnetic field strengths to stimulate the brain. Specifically, pain control may be achieved with PEMF and for this analgesic effect, coil design does not appear to play a dominant role. In addition, the flexible configuration with small coils on a head cap improves clinical applicability.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 41 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 26%
Student > Master 7 16%
Other 5 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Researcher 3 7%
Other 10 23%
Unknown 4 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 35%
Engineering 5 12%
Psychology 4 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 7%
Neuroscience 3 7%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 7 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 07 November 2019.
All research outputs
#3,609,639
of 22,707,247 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#44,697
of 193,889 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,001
of 197,527 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,029
of 5,134 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,707,247 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,889 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 197,527 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,134 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.