scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Abby Tabor

Bio: Abby Tabor is an academic researcher from University of Bath. The author has contributed to research in topics: Chronic pain & Action (philosophy). The author has an hindex of 11, co-authored 19 publications receiving 863 citations. Previous affiliations of Abby Tabor include University of Notre Dame Australia & King's College London.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
01 Aug 2013-Pain
TL;DR: A consistent, moderate significant effect is shown in this systematic review and meta‐analysis of 24 studies evaluating behavioural and/or physiological outcomes in a chronic pain group and a control group and high heterogeneity within the field was found.
Abstract: People with chronic pain commonly report impaired cognitive function. However, to date, there has been no systematic evaluation of the body of literature concerning cognitive impairment and pain. Nor have modern meta-analytical methods been used to verify and clarify the extent to which cognition may be impaired. The objective of this study was to systematically evaluate and critically appraise the literature concerning working memory function in people with chronic pain. The study was conducted along Cochrane collaboration and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement guidelines. A sensitive search strategy was designed and conducted with the help of an expert librarian using 6 databases. Twenty-four observational studies evaluating behavioural and/or physiological outcomes in a chronic pain group and a control group met the inclusion criteria. All studies had a high risk of bias, owing primarily to lack of assessor blinding to outcome. High heterogeneity within the field was found with the inclusion of 24 papers using 21 different working memory tests encompassing 9 different working memory constructs and 9 different chronic pain populations. Notwithstanding high heterogeneity, pooled results from behavioural outcomes reflected a consistent, significant moderate effect in favour of better performance by healthy controls and, with the exception of one study, pooled results from physiological outcomes reflected no evidence for an effect. Future research would benefit from the use of clearly defined constructs of working memory, as well as standardised methods of testing.

258 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The results suggest thatGMI and mirror therapy alone may be effective, although this conclusion is based on limited evidence, and further rigorous studies are needed to investigate the effects of GMI and its components on a wider chronic pain population.

225 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A small to moderate impairment in executive function performance was found in people with chronic pain across cognitive components, although all studies had a high risk of bias.

214 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Individual clinicians are able to reliably assess TPD threshold at the neck, back, hand and foot using mechanical callipers, which suggests clinicians should be cautious when interpreting changes in tactile acuity in individual patients.
Abstract: Objective. Chronic pain from rheumatic and musculoskeletal conditions is associated with cortical changes and altered tactile acuity. Tactile acuity is considered a clinical signature of primary somatosensory representation. The two-point discrimination (TPD) threshold is increasingly used both clinically and in research. Remarkably, the reliability and precision of the measure at commonly used sites has not been determined. This study aimed to determine the utility, intra- and inter-rater reliability, bias and variability of TPD threshold assessment at the neck, back, hand and foot using mechanical callipers. Methods. Intra- and inter-rater reliability of TPD was assessed at the back, neck, hand and foot of 28 healthy young adults by 28 clinicians. Each clinician received training in the assessment of TPD using mechanical callipers and following a standardized protocol. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and BlandAltman plots were used to assess reliability, bias and variability. Results. Intra-rater assessments in all four regions and inter-rater assessments at the neck and foot were reliable (ICC range 0.790.86), but large variability was seen in all assessments. Inter-rater assessment of the back (ICC = 0.66) and hand (ICC = 0.62) was deemed unreliable. Negligible systematic bias suggested learning did not affect reliability. Conclusion. Individual clinicians are able to reliably assess TPD threshold at the neck, back, hand and foot using mechanical callipers. Measures obtained by different clinicians were only reliable for the neck and foot. Large variability was observed in all assessments, which suggests clinicians should be cautious when interpreting changes in tactile acuity in individual patients.

127 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is argued that the experience of pain is no different; it is based on incomplete, multimodal information, which is used to estimate potential bodily threat, and a Bayesian inference model is outlined, incorporating the key components of cue combination, causal inference, and temporal integration.
Abstract: Perception is seen as a process that utilises partial and noisy information to construct a coherent understanding of the world. Here we argue that the experience of pain is no different; it is based on incomplete, multimodal information, which is used to estimate potential bodily threat. We outline a Bayesian inference model, incorporating the key components of cue combination, causal inference, and temporal integration, which highlights the statistical problems in everyday perception. It is from this platform that we are able to review the pain literature, providing evidence from experimental, acute, and persistent phenomena to demonstrate the advantages of adopting a statistical account in pain. Our probabilistic conceptualisation suggests a principles-based view of pain, explaining a broad range of experimental and clinical findings and making testable predictions.

75 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
08 Sep 1978-Science

5,182 citations

01 Nov 2008

2,686 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Miller, Galanter, and Pribram as discussed by the authors discuss the difference between the brain and its vast number of parallel channels, but few operations, and the modern high-speed computer with its few channels and vast numbers of operations.
Abstract: which is used to describe a third component of thinking processes, particularly preverbal, and it denotes the concept that the world is activated by some generalized "energy" that links together causally all objects and events ; it is presumably revealed by a person's lack of curiosity about causal connections, as though they were self-evident. Aside from the rather frequent use of such key words, having strong connotations for this reviewer far away from what the author is aiming to denote, the book is written in a lucid and stimulating style that makes reading it an invigorating intellectual exercise. It is a book that is likely to have somewhat limited attraction to the full-time clinician, especially one treating adult patients. And child psychiatrists and psychologists, if reasonably well read, will most likely be familiar with the majority of references from which this author has synthesized his material. On the other hand, the scholarly and refreshing con¬ ceptual approaches of the author will appeal to psychologists, philosophers, linguists, and psychiatrists with a research bent and anyone else who wants to be provoked to do some thinking on the problems of language, language development, and the psychology of cognition. Louis A. GOTTSCHALK, M.D. Plans and the Structure of Behavior. By George A Miller, Eugene gALANTER, and Karl H. Pribram. Price, $5.00. Pp. 226. Henry Holt & Co., Inc., New York 17, 1960. This is an important book for psychiatrists and behavioral scientists, since it presents a clear, concise study of the application of cybernetics, information and computer theory to the problem of analyzing behavior. The authors have been actively engaged in behavioral research in different areas\p=m-\Millerin information and communication, Galanter in experimental psychology, and Pribram in neurophysiology. The book resulted from a series of discussions which they engaged in during a year they spent together at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, Palo Alto, Calif. Their original intent was to write a diary, as it were, of the development of their ideas and, fortunately, enough of this remains to make the book clear, easy to read, and interesting. It is also fortunate, however, that in the final writing a variety of studies comparing the "behavior" of computing machines with human "cognitive behavior" have been reviewed and summarized. The result is one of the best presentations of the present status of the brain-computer problem. The authors, however, do not discuss certain aspects of this problem, such as the difference between the brain and its vast number of parallel channels, but few operations, and the modern high-speed computer with its few channels and vast numbers of operations. This omission is consistent with their interest, since it would introduce the question of mechanisms rather than the problem of the structure of behavior as it is observed in everyday life in the clinic and in experiments on learning, conditioning, etc. Similarly, they do not discuss the qualitative differences between mechanisms of memory in the computer and those in the brain. In the former, a "memory"\p=m-\ i.e., stored information\p=m-\isidentified, metaphorically speaking, by an address, whereas no such mechanism is known in the brain (personal communication, Dr. Julian Bigelow). With few exceptions, however, the data, concepts, and theories presented are handled with elegant precision, as illustrated by the discussion of Sherrington's concepts of the "Reflex" and the "Synapse," Kurt Lewin's ideas of "tension states," and the numerous references to the work of Newell, Shaw, and Simon on computers and logic. There are, nevertheless, areas with

1,219 citations

Book Chapter
01 Jan 2006
TL;DR: The Wall and Melzack's Textbook of Pain is revised under new editorial leadership, and with a host of new, multidisciplinary international contributors.
Abstract: WALL AND MELZACK'S TEXTBOOK OF PAIN, revised under new editorial leadership, and with a host of new, multidisciplinary international contributors ...

527 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
01 May 2020-Pain
TL;DR: The public health consequences of COVID-19 for patients with pain; the consequences of not treating these patients for the unknown duration of this pandemic; options for remote assessment and management; and clinical evidence supporting remote therapies are considered.
Abstract: Across the world, pain treatment centres have closed their doors. Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare providers are abruptly changing their care delivery to protect patients and staff from infection and to reallocate resource towards the greatest acute needs. Elective, routine, and nonemergency casework has stopped in secondary and tertiary centres, while in primary care, patients are requested to stay away or “socially distance,” and in residential care facilities and hospices, strict isolation and separation protocols have been introduced. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine and eHealth approaches were being developed and tested in a gradual fashion with many studies focusing on lessons learned and barriers to using digital solutions.3,37,39,51 Overnight, however, treating or supporting people with non-urgent and long-term conditions at a distance from healthcare providers has become imperative. These immediate changes are happening across healthcare systems. Telemedicine is being used to demand-manage the flow of patients with respiratory distress accessing emergency departments25; video consultation is being introduced in multiple settings23; and using social media is being discussed positively for its potential to direct people to trusted resources, to counteract misinformation, and to provide psychological first aid.36 Pain management providers face the challenge of delivering face-to-face service through different modes. Fortunately, there is a rich stream of research and clinical experience in the use of different technological solutions. Table ​Table11 provides a summary of the definitions and terminology in use. Table 1 Definitions and terminology used in remotely supported pain management.

328 citations