Chronic PainNCT04603417
Pain Avoidance Behavior and Its Relation to Risk for Opioid Use in Chronic Pain Patients
A study testing Electroencephalography (EEG)/Magnetoencephalography (MEG)/MRI in people with Chronic Pain and Opioid Use, run by The Cleveland Clinic at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
This study is designed to find behavioral and neurophysiological correlates of pain avoidance behavior among chronic pain patients, controlling for risk for opioid use disorder. Further, traits and risk factors that contribute to pain avoidance behavior will be investigated. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Chronic Pain, Opioid Use
- What is being tested?
- Electroencephalography (EEG)/Magnetoencephalography (MEG)/MRI
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 63 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 15 Aug 2020to 30 Apr 2024
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- 18 years and older
- Diagnosis of CRPS I, CRPS II
- Six months or more of medically refractory severe pain
- Average daily pain for the past 30 days reported as ≥ 5 on a 0 - 10 scale
- Presence of allodynia
- Unilateral pain or pain affecting predominantly one extremity. Predominantly will be operationally defined at >=75 of pain on one extremity.
Show all 9Show fewer
- Willingness to complete behavioral, clinical and neurophysiological measurement procedures
- Able to provide informed consent
- Able to undergo structural brain MRI
Who cannot join
- 17 years and younger
- All other pain diagnosis
- Less than six months or more of medically refractory severe pain
- Average daily pain for the past 30 days reported as < 5 on a 0 - 10 scale
- Absence of allodynia
- Bilateral pain
Show all 9Show fewer
- Unwillingness to complete behavioral, clinical and neurophysiological measurement procedures
- Unable to provide informed consent
- Claustrophobic or unable to undergo MRI, MEG or unsafe to undergo MRI (i.e. due to MRI unsafe medical implants).
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
This study is designed to find behavioral and neurophysiological correlates of pain avoidance behavior among chronic pain patients, controlling for risk for opioid use disorder. Further, traits and risk factors that contribute to pain avoidance behavior will be investigated. The knowledge gained will broaden the current understanding of mechanisms involved in pain avoidance behavior in chronic pain patients, and help devise novel interventions.
Read the detailed description
Overall Research Design. The overarching goal of this study is to gain mechanistic insights into maladaptive pain avoidance behavior and risk factors that could provide a pathway for OUD in chronic pain patients. We aim to explore the neurophysiological constructs (brain oscillations) of the maladaptive pain avoidance behavior. Advancing this knowledge will open new opportunities for future clinical interventions to prevent opioid addiction in chronic pain patients. Aim-1 is based on a mechanistic framework termed predictive coding, and is designed to elicit cue-pain associative learning impairments that form the basis for maladaptive pain avoidance behavior in chronic pain patients. Aim-2 is designed to examine the influence of OUD related personality traits and risk factors in moderating maladaptive pain avoidance behavior. We strongly believe that aim-1 and 2 will aid the development of future clinical paradigms for early identification of patients vulnerable to OUD, treatment resistance and other psychodynamic factors that increase the risk for poor outcomes. Aim-3 further enhances the scope of the project by incorporating the study of brain oscillations during pain avoidance behavior that could help the development of non-addictive neuromodulation based interventions to promote extinction of learned maladaptive pain avoidance behavior.
Subjects. The study will evaluate patients with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS) who present with central sensitization i.e. allodynia (pain response to a non-painful stimulus) and/or hyperalgesia (exaggerated pain response to a nociceptive stimulus), and age/gender matched healthy controls. The advantage of the CRPS model of chronic pain is that it is common and a common cause of post-injury disability. Additionally, patients typically present with an affected and non-affected extremity/site facilitating within-subject comparison. Patients will be considered candidates after review of their history, neurological and psychological pain assessment. Healthy controls will be recruited through fliers posted throughout our campus and by referrals from other studies.
Sample Size. Sample size is 30 patients and 30 age/gender-matched controls. The sample size was chosen based on the recommended power size for cue-based pain modulation studies.
Study Design. This cross-sectional study will present the participants with an instrumental pain avoidance learning task, while we record continuous MEG brain signals, and other autonomic measurements. All participants, upon initial screening and enrollment, will report to our MEG facility on the day of testing. They will undergo: 1) training to understand the task; 2) scalp measurements for head tracking inside the MEG scanner; and 3) actual testing in the MEG. A T1-weighted MRI (for anatomical co-registration of MEG data) will be acquired separately, if a suitable dataset is not already available.
Health History and clinical assessments. All patients will complete neuropsychological and pain assessments to rate their current pain, disability, fear, anxiety, and depression using standardized scales. In addition, we will administer Temperament and Character Inventory (TCI) questionnaire to assess the traits for aim-2.
OUD risk classification:
The Cleveland Clinic Alcohol and Drug Recovery Center (ADRC) staff has standard procedures to determine the risk for OUD based on biological, psychiatric and social risk factors derived from health history questionnaires. Each patient enrolled will get an ADRC assessment that will include one of three determinations: "Low Risk", "At Risk", or "Substance Use Disorder." The risk for OUD will be used as a covariate in our analysis for all aims, as necessary.
Effects of Drugs. We will convert all medicine dosages that patients currently take to that of a representative medicine in class dosage (e.g. pain killers, antidepressants) and then use that as a covariate in the analysis, as necessary, to examine drug effects on the results.
Instrumental pain avoidance task. The task will comprise 150 trials (3 runs of 50 trials), during which subjects will select a visual cue (out of 2 choices) with the lowest probability of receiving a painful stimulus. They start out by trial and error, but will soon learn to associate a cue with higher probability of receiving a painful outcome and avoid the cue. At least twice during the testing, the pain outcome contingencies of the cues will reverse and the subjects will have to adjust accordingly. The probabilities (for receiving a painful outcome) associated with each cue will be independent of one another and varied from trial to trial probabilistically. Each trial starts with the presentation of the two options (circle or square, randomly displayed to the left or right) for 1.8s, during which participants enter their decision by pressing the left or right button of the response unit. Inactivity will result in the computer randomly selecting a response. After a feedback period of 200ms and an anticipatory period of 2s, the fixation point changes from a cross (+) to an asterisk (*) displayed for 3s to mark the period during which participants could receive a painful or no stimulus. Following a painful stimulus, participants will rate their pain by clicking on a computerized visual analog scale (CoVAS, Medoc Inc.) presented on the screen. The next trial starts after a jittered inter-trial interval of 3 - 5s. To minimize the effects of sensitization/habituation, the painful stimulus will be delivered to a slightly different location after each run. Participants will perform a limited practice session with visual cues and pain outcome probability different from the test session. During practice, they will be carefully instructed about all aspects of the experiment, except the actual probabilities of pain. Patient's non-affected extremity will be tested before the affected extremity.
Experimental pain: For this proposal, a pneumatic pressure pain device (PPD) developed at the University of Colorado (Wager lab) will be used. The PPD uses a pneumatic piston to deliver pain stimuli, and can be adapted to deliver pain to any part of the body. We propose to use either the thumb or the index finger. Prior to experimental task, participants will be tested for threshold limits to identify pain stimuli intensity. We will use a stepwise procedure, where pressure in the piston will be increased in steps of 1kg/cm (ramp and hold for 1s) from lowest possible level to a level where participants pain perception is equal to 8 on a VAS (0, no sensation; 10, worst possible pain).
Electrophysiology/Neurophysiology. Our group has proven success in collecting pain event-related electrophysiological recordings from patients, including MEG/electroencephalography (MEEG). Here, we will be collecting these data while subjects perform the task described above. Simultaneous measurement of scalp MEEG (2400 samples/sec) will be performed in a magnetically shielded room (Imedco, Switzerland). The 306-channel MEG system (Elekta, Finland) at Cleveland Clinic records both MEG and up to 128 channels of EEG. For scalp EEG, international 10-10 electrode placement will be employed. The MEG system has additional channels with appropriate gains for recording autonomic measures such as electrocardiogram (EKG) and skin conductance responses (SCR) using MEG compatible Ag/AgCl electrodes and standard procedures. SCR electrodes will be attached on the thenar and hypothenar eminences on the same extremity where pain will be delievered. Patients will be evaluated in a seated position. Prior to the experimental session, fiduciary points (nasion, right and left auricular), along with head surface points and head position indicator (HPI) locations will be tracked on subject's scalp using a Fastrack digitizer (Polhemus, USA) to allow for anatomical co-registration with MRI. The HPI tracks the position and orientation of the head to account for variance due to movement. Subjects will be monitored inside the MEG suite using a surveillance camera. An intercom system allows for communication with the subjects. An E-prime stimulus presentation system (Psychology Software Tools, USA) integrated with state-of-the-art projector (Panasonic, Japan) will be used to provide cues. Participants will undergo 3 - 5 mins of resting state MEEG measurements prior to the task.
- Conditions
- Chronic Pain, Opioid Use
- Being tested
- Electroencephalography (EEG)/Magnetoencephalography (MEG)/MRI
- Medical subject headings
- Chronic Pain
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Electroencephalography (EEG)/Magnetoencephalography (MEG)/MRIDiagnostic test
Also called Behavioral
This cross-sectional study will present the participants with an instrumental pain avoidance learning task, while we record continuous Magnetoencephalography (MEG) brain signals, and other autonomic measurements. All patients will complete behavioral, neuropsychological and pain assessments to rate their current pain, disability, fear, anxiety, and depression using standardized scales.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Patients | Other | Patients with CRPS diagnosis Receives: Diagnostic Test: Electroencephalography (EEG)/Magnetoencephalography (MEG)/MRI |
| Controls | Other | Healthy controls with known Neurological Disorders Receives: Diagnostic Test: Electroencephalography (EEG)/Magnetoencephalography (MEG)/MRI |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Magnetoencephalography (MEG)/Electroencephalography (EEG)
Brain oscillations during pain avoidance behavior
Measured: year1-5
Temperament and Character Inventory
Traits related to pain avoidance behavior
Measured: year1-5
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted26 Oct 2020
- Study start15 Aug 2020
- Primary completion30 Apr 2024
- Study completion30 Apr 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (4)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Chronic PainStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by The Cleveland ClinicThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 63 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- The Cleveland Clinic
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Raghavan Gopalakrishnan, The Cleveland Clinic
- Investigators
- Hubert Fernandez, MD, Study director, The Cleveland Clinic
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04603417
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 20-067
- Other IDs
- 1K01DA050804-01
- Status last verified
- Jun 2025
- First submitted
- 30 Sep 2020
- Last updated
- 27 Jun 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Roy M, Shohamy D, Daw N, Jepma M, Wimmer GE, Wager TD. Representation of aversive prediction errors in the human periaqueductal gray. Nat Neurosci. 2014 Nov;17(11):1607-12. doi: 10.1038/nn.3832. Epub 2014 Oct 5.
PubMed 25282614Gopalakrishnan R, Burgess RC, Malone DA, Lempka SF, Gale JT, Floden DP, Baker KB, Machado AG. Deep brain stimulation of the ventral striatal area for poststroke pain syndrome: a magnetoencephalography study. J Neurophysiol. 2018 Jun 1;119(6):2118-2128. doi: 10.1152/jn.00830.2017. Epub 2018 Jan 31.
PubMed 29384450Gopalakrishnan R, Malan NS, Sonneborn C, Hogue O, Tankha P, Baillet S, Roy M. Mechanisms Underlying Pain Avoidance in Complex Regional Pain Syndrome. Eur J Pain. 2026 Aug;30(7):e70339. doi: 10.1002/ejp.70339.
PubMed 42504856Gopalakrishnan R, Sonneborn C, Baillet S, Machado AG, Wager TD, Roy M. Neurophysiological encoding of aversive prediction errors. Pain. 2025 Dec 1;166(12):e732-e745. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000003712. Epub 2025 Jul 16.
PubMed 40668023
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 27 Jun 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Pain Avoidance Behavior and Its Relation to Risk for Opioid Use in Chronic Pain Patients
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04603417
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 20-067
- Conditions
- Chronic Pain, Opioid Use
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 63 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- The Cleveland ClinicUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
- Study start
- 15 Aug 2020 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Apr 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Apr 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 26 Oct 2020 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study is designed to find behavioral and neurophysiological correlates of pain avoidance behavior among chronic pain patients, controlling for risk for opioid use disorder. Further, traits and risk factors that contribute to pain avoidance behavior will be investigated. The knowledge gained will broaden the current understanding of mechanisms involved in pain avoidance behavior in chronic pain patients, and help devise novel interventions.
Detailed description
Overall Research Design. The overarching goal of this study is to gain mechanistic insights into maladaptive pain avoidance behavior and risk factors that could provide a pathway for OUD in chronic pain patients. We aim to explore the neurophysiological constructs (brain oscillations) of the maladaptive pain avoidance behavior. Advancing this knowledge will open new opportunities for future clinical interventions to prevent opioid addiction in chronic pain patients. Aim-1 is based on a mechanistic framework termed predictive coding, and is designed to elicit cue-pain associative learning impairments that form the basis for maladaptive pain avoidance behavior in chronic pain patients. Aim-2 is designed to examine the influence of OUD related personality traits and risk factors in moderating maladaptive pain avoidance behavior. We strongly believe that aim-1 and 2 will aid the development of future clinical paradigms for early identification of patients vulnerable to OUD, treatment resistance and other psychodynamic factors that increase the risk for poor outcomes. Aim-3 further enhances the scope of the project by incorporating the study of brain oscillations during pain avoidance behavior that could help the development of non-addictive neuromodulation based interventions to promote extinction of learned maladaptive pain avoidance behavior.
Subjects. The study will evaluate patients with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS) who present with central sensitization i.e. allodynia (pain response to a non-painful stimulus) and/or hyperalgesia (exaggerated pain response to a nociceptive stimulus), and age/gender matched healthy controls. The advantage of the CRPS model of chronic pain is that it is common and a common cause of post-injury disability. Additionally, patients typically present with an affected and non-affected extremity/site facilitating within-subject comparison. Patients will be considered candidates after review of their history, neurological and psychological pain assessment. Healthy controls will be recruited through fliers posted throughout our campus and by referrals from other studies.
Sample Size. Sample size is 30 patients and 30 age/gender-matched controls. The sample size was chosen based on the recommended power size for cue-based pain modulation studies.
Study Design. This cross-sectional study will present the participants with an instrumental pain avoidance learning task, while we record continuous MEG brain signals, and other autonomic measurements. All participants, upon initial screening and enrollment, will report to our MEG facility on the day of testing. They will undergo: 1) training to understand the task; 2) scalp measurements for head tracking inside the MEG scanner; and 3) actual testing in the MEG. A T1-weighted MRI (for anatomical co-registration of MEG data) will be acquired separately, if a suitable dataset is not already available.
Health History and clinical assessments. All patients will complete neuropsychological and pain assessments to rate their current pain, disability, fear, anxiety, and depression using standardized scales. In addition, we will administer Temperament and Character Inventory (TCI) questionnaire to assess the traits for aim-2.
OUD risk classification:
The Cleveland Clinic Alcohol and Drug Recovery Center (ADRC) staff has standard procedures to determine the risk for OUD based on biological, psychiatric and social risk factors derived from health history questionnaires. Each patient enrolled will get an ADRC assessment that will include one of three determinations: "Low Risk", "At Risk", or "Substance Use Disorder." The risk for OUD will be used as a covariate in our analysis for all aims, as necessary.
Effects of Drugs. We will convert all medicine dosages that patients currently take to that of a representative medicine in class dosage (e.g. pain killers, antidepressants) and then use that as a covariate in the analysis, as necessary, to examine drug effects on the results.
Instrumental pain avoidance task. The task will comprise 150 trials (3 runs of 50 trials), during which subjects will select a visual cue (out of 2 choices) with the lowest probability of receiving a painful stimulus. They start out by trial and error, but will soon learn to associate a cue with higher probability of receiving a painful outcome and avoid the cue. At least twice during the testing, the pain outcome contingencies of the cues will reverse and the subjects will have to adjust accordingly. The probabilities (for receiving a painful outcome) associated with each cue will be independent of one another and varied from trial to trial probabilistically. Each trial starts with the presentation of the two options (circle or square, randomly displayed to the left or right) for 1.8s, during which participants enter their decision by pressing the left or right button of the response unit. Inactivity will result in the computer randomly selecting a response. After a feedback period of 200ms and an anticipatory period of 2s, the fixation point changes from a cross (+) to an asterisk (*) displayed for 3s to mark the period during which participants could receive a painful or no stimulus. Following a painful stimulus, participants will rate their pain by clicking on a computerized visual analog scale (CoVAS, Medoc Inc.) presented on the screen. The next trial starts after a jittered inter-trial interval of 3 - 5s. To minimize the effects of sensitization/habituation, the painful stimulus will be delivered to a slightly different location after each run. Participants will perform a limited practice session with visual cues and pain outcome probability different from the test session. During practice, they will be carefully instructed about all aspects of the experiment, except the actual probabilities of pain. Patient's non-affected extremity will be tested before the affected extremity.
Experimental pain: For this proposal, a pneumatic pressure pain device (PPD) developed at the University of Colorado (Wager lab) will be used. The PPD uses a pneumatic piston to deliver pain stimuli, and can be adapted to deliver pain to any part of the body. We propose to use either the thumb or the index finger. Prior to experimental task, participants will be tested for threshold limits to identify pain stimuli intensity. We will use a stepwise procedure, where pressure in the piston will be increased in steps of 1kg/cm (ramp and hold for 1s) from lowest possible level to a level where participants pain perception is equal to 8 on a VAS (0, no sensation; 10, worst possible pain).
Electrophysiology/Neurophysiology. Our group has proven success in collecting pain event-related electrophysiological recordings from patients, including MEG/electroencephalography (MEEG). Here, we will be collecting these data while subjects perform the task described above. Simultaneous measurement of scalp MEEG (2400 samples/sec) will be performed in a magnetically shielded room (Imedco, Switzerland). The 306-channel MEG system (Elekta, Finland) at Cleveland Clinic records both MEG and up to 128 channels of EEG. For scalp EEG, international 10-10 electrode placement will be employed. The MEG system has additional channels with appropriate gains for recording autonomic measures such as electrocardiogram (EKG) and skin conductance responses (SCR) using MEG compatible Ag/AgCl electrodes and standard procedures. SCR electrodes will be attached on the thenar and hypothenar eminences on the same extremity where pain will be delievered. Patients will be evaluated in a seated position. Prior to the experimental session, fiduciary points (nasion, right and left auricular), along with head surface points and head position indicator (HPI) locations will be tracked on subject's scalp using a Fastrack digitizer (Polhemus, USA) to allow for anatomical co-registration with MRI. The HPI tracks the position and orientation of the head to account for variance due to movement. Subjects will be monitored inside the MEG suite using a surveillance camera. An intercom system allows for communication with the subjects. An E-prime stimulus presentation system (Psychology Software Tools, USA) integrated with state-of-the-art projector (Panasonic, Japan) will be used to provide cues. Participants will undergo 3 - 5 mins of resting state MEEG measurements prior to the task.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Patients | Other | Diagnostic Test: Electroencephalography (EEG)/Magnetoencephalography (MEG)/MRIPatients with CRPS diagnosis |
| Controls | Other | Diagnostic Test: Electroencephalography (EEG)/Magnetoencephalography (MEG)/MRIHealthy controls with known Neurological Disorders |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (9 listed)
- 18 years and older
- Diagnosis of CRPS I, CRPS II
- Six months or more of medically refractory severe pain
- Average daily pain for the past 30 days reported as ≥ 5 on a 0 - 10 scale
- Presence of allodynia
Key exclusion criteria (9 listed)
- 17 years and younger
- All other pain diagnosis
- Less than six months or more of medically refractory severe pain
- Average daily pain for the past 30 days reported as < 5 on a 0 - 10 scale
- Absence of allodynia
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Electroencephalography (EEG)/Magnetoencephalography (MEG)/MRIAlso: BehavioralThis cross-sectional study will present the participants with an instrumental pain avoidance learning task, while we record continuous Magnetoencephalography (MEG) brain signals, and other autonomic measurements. All patients will complete behavioral, neuropsychological and pain assessments to rate their current pain, disability, fear, anxiety, and depression using standardized scales. | Diagnostic test | Controls, Patients |
Primary outcome
Magnetoencephalography (MEG)/Electroencephalography (EEG)
Time frame: year1-5
Brain oscillations during pain avoidance behavior
Temperament and Character Inventory
Time frame: year1-5
Traits related to pain avoidance behavior
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 27 Jun 2025.
- Background: PubMed 25282614Roy M, Shohamy D, Daw N, Jepma M, Wimmer GE, Wager TD. Representation of aversive prediction errors in the human periaqueductal gray. Nat Neurosci. 2014 Nov;17(11):1607-12. doi: 10.1038/nn.3832. Epub 2014 Oct 5.
- Background: PubMed 29384450Gopalakrishnan R, Burgess RC, Malone DA, Lempka SF, Gale JT, Floden DP, Baker KB, Machado AG. Deep brain stimulation of the ventral striatal area for poststroke pain syndrome: a magnetoencephalography study. J Neurophysiol. 2018 Jun 1;119(6):2118-2128. doi: 10.1152/jn.00830.2017. Epub 2018 Jan 31.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 42504856Gopalakrishnan R, Malan NS, Sonneborn C, Hogue O, Tankha P, Baillet S, Roy M. Mechanisms Underlying Pain Avoidance in Complex Regional Pain Syndrome. Eur J Pain. 2026 Aug;30(7):e70339. doi: 10.1002/ejp.70339.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 40668023Gopalakrishnan R, Sonneborn C, Baillet S, Machado AG, Wager TD, Roy M. Neurophysiological encoding of aversive prediction errors. Pain. 2025 Dec 1;166(12):e732-e745. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000003712. Epub 2025 Jul 16.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Chronic Pain
RecruitingObservational study
Lemborexant vs Clonidine vs Sedatives to Treat Insomnia in Chronic Pain Patients
Chronic Insomnia, Chronic Pain
RecruitingPhase 3
Efficacy and Safety of VER-01 in the Treatment of Participants With Chronic Painful Lumbosacral Radiculopathy
Lumbosacral Radiculopathy
Recruiting
Light Bulb Stimuli to Reduce Chronic Pain
Fibromyalgia, Musculoskeletal Pain
Active, not recruiting
Probiotics for Inflammation in Pediatric Chronic Pain
Chronic Pain, Body Mass Index >=85th Percentile
Not yet recruiting
Comparison of the Effectiveness of Motor Imagery Exercises and Suboccipital Myofascial Release Techniques in Nonspecific Chronic Neck Pain
Non-specific Chronic Neck Pain
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Hubert Fernandez, MD study director
The Cleveland Clinic
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Electroencephalography (EEG)/Magnetoencephalography (MEG)/MRI in people with Chronic Pain and Opioid Use, run by The Cleveland Clinic at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 9 inclusion and 9 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 27 Jun 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Magnetoencephalography (MEG)/Electroencephalography (EEG) (time frame: year1-5). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04603417, which also lists 4 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 27 Jun 2025.