Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Studies of the neural basis of human pain processing present many challenges because of the subjective and variable nature of pain, and the inaccessibility of the central nervous system. Neuroimaging methods, such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), have provided the ability to investigate these neural processes, and yet commonly used analysis methods may not be optimally adapted for studies of pain. Here we present a comparison of model-driven and data-driven analysis methods, specifically for the study of human pain processing. Methods are tested using data from healthy control participants in two previous studies, with separate data sets spanning the brain, and the brainstem and spinal cord. Data are analyzed by fitting time-series responses to predicted BOLD responses in order to identify significantly responding regions (model-driven), as well as with connectivity analyses (data-driven) based on temporal correlations between responses in spatially separated regions, and with connectivity analyses based on structural equation modeling, allowing for multiple source regions to explain the signal variations in each target region. The results are assessed in terms of the amount of signal variance that can be explained in each region, and in terms of the regions and connections that are identified as having BOLD responses of interest. The characteristics of BOLD responses in identified regions are also investigated. The results demonstrate that data-driven approaches are more effective than model-driven approaches for fMRI studies of pain.
Stroman et al. (Mon,) studied this question.