190 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34908144)
1. Absolute and Relative Reliability of a Comprehensive Quantitative Sensory Testing Protocol in Women Treated for Breast Cancer.
Dams L; Haenen V; Van der Gucht E; Devoogdt N; Smeets A; Bernar K; De Vrieze T; De Groef A; Meeus M
Pain Med; 2022 May; 23(6):1162-1175. PubMed ID: 34908144
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Test-retest agreement and reliability of quantitative sensory testing 1 year after breast cancer surgery.
Andersen KG; Kehlet H; Aasvang EK
Clin J Pain; 2015 May; 31(5):393-403. PubMed ID: 25084072
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Short-term test-retest-reliability of conditioned pain modulation using the cold-heat-pain method in healthy subjects and its correlation to parameters of standardized quantitative sensory testing.
Gehling J; Mainka T; Vollert J; Pogatzki-Zahn EM; Maier C; Enax-Krumova EK
BMC Neurol; 2016 Aug; 16():125. PubMed ID: 27495743
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The long-term reliability of static and dynamic quantitative sensory testing in healthy individuals.
Marcuzzi A; Wrigley PJ; Dean CM; Adams R; Hush JM
Pain; 2017 Jul; 158(7):1217-1223. PubMed ID: 28328574
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Multifactorial assessment of measurement errors affecting intraoral quantitative sensory testing reliability.
Moana-Filho EJ; Alonso AA; Kapos FP; Leon-Salazar V; Durand SH; Hodges JS; Nixdorf DR
Scand J Pain; 2017 Jul; 16():93-98. PubMed ID: 28850419
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Reliability of the conditioned pain modulation paradigm across three anatomical sites.
Nuwailati R; Curatolo M; LeResche L; Ramsay DS; Spiekerman C; Drangsholt M
Scand J Pain; 2020 Apr; 20(2):283-296. PubMed ID: 31812949
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Quantitative Sensory Testing in Women After Surgery for Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis.
Dams L; Van der Gucht E; Meeus M; Devoogdt N; Smeets A; Penen F; De Baerdemaecker T; Haenen V; Bernar K; De Vrieze T; De Groef A
Clin J Pain; 2021 Jul; 37(7):538-564. PubMed ID: 33883413
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Reliability of static and dynamic quantitative sensory testing in patients with painful chronic pancreatitis.
Olesen SS; van Goor H; Bouwense SA; Wilder-Smith OH; Drewes AM
Reg Anesth Pain Med; 2012; 37(5):530-6. PubMed ID: 22854397
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Assessment of CPM reliability: quantification of the within-subject reliability of 10 different protocols.
Vaegter HB; Petersen KK; Mørch CD; Imai Y; Arendt-Nielsen L
Scand J Pain; 2018 Oct; 18(4):729-737. PubMed ID: 30007061
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Reproducibility of quantitative sensory testing applied to musculoskeletal orofacial region: Site and sex differences.
Costa YM; de Araújo-Júnior ENS; Fiedler LS; de Souza PRJ; Silva LLCP; Ferreira DMAO; Conti PCR; Bonjardim LR
Eur J Pain; 2019 Jan; 23(1):81-90. PubMed ID: 29989267
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Quantitative sensory testing: a comprehensive protocol for clinical trials.
Rolke R; Magerl W; Campbell KA; Schalber C; Caspari S; Birklein F; Treede RD
Eur J Pain; 2006 Jan; 10(1):77-88. PubMed ID: 16291301
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Reliability of temporal summation, thermal and pressure pain thresholds in a healthy cohort and musculoskeletal trauma population.
Middlebrook N; Heneghan NR; Evans DW; Rushton A; Falla D
PLoS One; 2020; 15(5):e0233521. PubMed ID: 32469913
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Test-retest reliability of quantitative sensory testing for mechanical somatosensory and pain modulation assessment of masticatory structures.
Costa YM; Morita-Neto O; de Araújo-Júnior EN; Sampaio FA; Conti PC; Bonjardim LR
J Oral Rehabil; 2017 Mar; 44(3):197-204. PubMed ID: 28008644
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Reliability of intra-oral quantitative sensory testing (QST) in patients with atypical odontalgia and healthy controls - a multicentre study.
Baad-Hansen L; Pigg M; Yang G; List T; Svensson P; Drangsholt M
J Oral Rehabil; 2015 Feb; 42(2):127-35. PubMed ID: 25284726
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Test-Retest Instability of Temporal Summation and Conditioned Pain Modulation Measures in Older Adults.
Naugle KM; Ohlman T; Wind B; Miller L
Pain Med; 2020 Nov; 21(11):2863-2876. PubMed ID: 33083842
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Improving QST Reliability--More Raters, Tests, or Occasions? A Multivariate Generalizability Study.
O'Neill S; O'Neill L
J Pain; 2015 May; 16(5):454-62. PubMed ID: 25683899
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Test-retest reliability of thermal quantitative sensory testing on two sites within the L5 dermatome of the lumbar spine and lower extremity.
Knutti IA; Suter MR; Opsommer E
Neurosci Lett; 2014 Sep; 579():157-62. PubMed ID: 25064700
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Concurrent validity of dynamic bedside quantitative sensory testing paradigms in breast cancer survivors with persistent pain.
Haenen V; Meeus M; Devoogdt N; Morlion B; Dams L; De Groote A; Foubert A; De Groef A
Scand J Pain; 2024 Jan; 24(1):. PubMed ID: 38498596
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The interrater and test-retest reliability of 3 modalities of quantitative sensory testing in healthy adults and people with chronic low back pain or rheumatoid arthritis.
Brady SM; Georgopoulos V; Veldhuijzen van Zanten JJCS; Duda JL; Metsios GS; Kitas GD; Fenton SAM; Walsh DA; McWilliams DF
Pain Rep; 2023 Dec; 8(6):e1102. PubMed ID: 37829138
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Development of a new bed-side-test assessing conditioned pain modulation: a test-retest reliability study.
Larsen JB; Madeleine P; Arendt-Nielsen L
Scand J Pain; 2019 Jul; 19(3):565-574. PubMed ID: 30920956
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
