Back

Quantifying intra-individual variability in anatomical sites of pain in longitudinal studies

Madden, V. J.; Arendse, G.; Kamerman, P.; Bedwell, G. J.; Mqadi, L.; Wadley, A. J.; Edwards, R. R.; Joska, J. A.; Parker, R.

2025-10-24 pain medicine
10.1101/2025.10.23.25337565 medRxiv
Show abstract

Longitudinal pain studies present an opportunity to understand intra-individual variations in pain. However, current methods to quantify the anatomical extent of pain fail to capture variations across multiple body sites over time. Our aims were to (1) describe patterns of intra-individual variation in pain sites over time, (2) develop a metric that quantifies intra-individual variation in pain sites over time, and (3) determine whether this metric is related to other indicators of pain burden. We used data from a longitudinal cohort of 72 participants (51 female; median (IQR) age 43 (37-51) years) living with virally suppressed HIV, who provided weekly reports of pain severity, pain site(s), and distress over 49 weeks. Participant reports showed noteworthy intra-individual changes in pain sites over time. The pain sites variation metric, based on 727 consecutive reports from 53 participants, reflected intra-individual temporal variation in pain sites, and distinguished participants with consistent pain sites from participants with high temporal variation in pain sites. The metric was positively associated with pain severity and emotional distress, but only when unadjusted for the count of painful sites. Thus, using a longitudinal cohort, we developed a metric that quantifies individual temporal variability in pain sites and demonstrated its relationship to two frequently used metrics of pain burden, namely pain severity and distress. This metric provides an opportunity to study whether the number of, and variability in, pain sites contributes to pain burden and clinical outcomes.

Matching journals

The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.