Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Personalized brain decoding of spontaneous pain in individuals with chronic pain

Abstract

Spontaneous pain is a hallmark of chronic pain disorders, but its assessment remains limited by the lack of objective biomarkers. Here we used precision functional magnetic resonance imaging data, collected over more than half a year from two individuals with chronic pain, to develop personalized brain-decoding models of spontaneous pain. The personalized decoding models accurately tracked fluctuations in spontaneous pain intensity across sessions, runs and minutes (Participant 1: prediction–outcome correlation, r = 0.40–0.61; Participant 2: r = 0.51–0.65) and effectively discriminated between median-dichotomized high- versus low-pain states (Participant 1: area under the curve = 0.71–0.87; Participant 2: area under the curve = 0.76–0.93). Model performance improved with increased training data, with conventional data quantities failing to achieve significant predictive accuracy. Furthermore, each model relied on individually unique brain features and did not generalize across participants. This study indicates that functional magnetic resonance imaging can assess spontaneous pain, highlighting the need for precise, patient-specific approaches.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Study overview.
Fig. 2: Prediction performance.
Fig. 3: Effect of training data size on decoding performance.
Fig. 4: Feature importance maps.
Fig. 5: Cross-testing of personalized decoding models.

Data availability

Raw MRI data are publicly available at https://openneuro.org/datasets/ds006815. All the data to generate the figures are available via figshare at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.31064431 (ref. 44). Source data are provided with this paper.

Code availability

Code for the main analyses is available via GitHub at https://github.com/cocoanlab/DEIPP (ref. 45).

References

  1. Dahlhamer, J. et al. Prevalence of chronic pain and high-impact chronic pain among adults - United States, 2016. MMWR Morb. Mortal. Wkly Rep. 67, 1001–1006 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Foss, J. M., Apkarian, A. V. & Chialvo, D. R. Dynamics of pain: fractal dimension of temporal variability of spontaneous pain differentiates between pain States. J. Neurophysiol. 95, 730–736 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Mun, C. J. et al. Investigating intraindividual pain variability: methods, applications, issues, and directions. Pain 160, 2415–2429 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Smith, S. M. et al. Pain intensity rating training: results from an exploratory study of the ACTTION PROTECCT system. Pain 157, 1056–1064 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Davis, K. D. et al. Discovery and validation of biomarkers to aid the development of safe and effective pain therapeutics: challenges and opportunities. Nat. Rev. Neurol. 16, 381–400 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Wager, T. D. et al. An fMRI-based neurologic signature of physical pain. N. Engl. J. Med. 368, 1388–1397 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Woo, C. W. et al. Quantifying cerebral contributions to pain beyond nociception. Nat. Commun. 8, 14211 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Lee, J. J. et al. A neuroimaging biomarker for sustained experimental and clinical pain. Nat. Med. 27, 174–182 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Baliki, M. N. et al. Chronic pain and the emotional brain: specific brain activity associated with spontaneous fluctuations of intensity of chronic back pain. J. Neurosci. 26, 12165–12173 (2006).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Jaillard, A. & Ropper, A. H. Pain, heat, and emotion with functional MRI. N. Engl. J. Med. 368, 1447–1449 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. FDA-NIH Biomarker Working Group. BEST (Biomarkers, EndpointS, and other Tools) Resource (FDA, 2016).

  12. Cheng, J. C. et al. Multivariate machine learning distinguishes cross-network dynamic functional connectivity patterns in state and trait neuropathic pain. Pain 159, 1764–1776 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Lee, J. et al. Machine learning-based prediction of clinical pain using multimodal neuroimaging and autonomic metrics. Pain 160, 550–560 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Gordon, E. M. et al. Precision functional mapping of individual human brains. Neuron 95, 791–807 e797 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Porter, A. et al. Masked features of task states found in individual brain networks. Cereb. Cortex 33, 2879–2900 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Kraus, B. et al. Insights from personalized models of brain and behavior for identifying biomarkers in psychiatry. Neurosci. Biobehav Rev. 152, 105259 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Mayr, A. et al. Patients with chronic pain exhibit individually unique cortical signatures of pain encoding. Hum. Brain Mapp. 43, 1676–1693 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Reddan, M. C. Recommendations for the development of socioeconomically-situated and clinically-relevant neuroimaging models of pain. Front. Neurol. 12, 700833 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Vansteensel, M. J. et al. Fully implanted brain-computer interface in a locked-in patient with ALS. N. Engl. J. Med. 375, 2060–2066 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Moses, D. A. et al. Neuroprosthesis for decoding speech in a paralyzed person with anarthria. N. Engl. J. Med. 385, 217–227 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Alagapan, S. et al. Cingulate dynamics track depression recovery with deep brain stimulation. Nature 622, 130–138 (2023).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Shirvalkar, P. et al. First-in-human prediction of chronic pain state using intracranial neural biomarkers. Nat. Neurosci. 26, 1090–1099 (2023).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Altman, D. G. & Royston, P. The cost of dichotomising continuous variables. Br. Med. J. 332, 1080 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Coghill, R. C. The distributed nociceptive system: a framework for understanding pain. Trends Neurosci. 43, 780–794 (2020).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Farmer, M. A., Baliki, M. N. & Apkarian, A. V. A dynamic network perspective of chronic pain. Neurosci. Lett. 520, 197–203 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Clauw, D. J. Fibromyalgia: a clinical review. JAMA 311, 1547–1555 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Zamani Esfahlani, F. et al. High-amplitude cofluctuations in cortical activity drive functional connectivity. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 28393–28401 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Lee, D. H., Lee, S. & Woo, C. W. Decoding pain: uncovering the factors that affect the performance of neuroimaging-based pain models. Pain 166, 360–375 (2025).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Hashmi, J. A. et al. Shape shifting pain: chronification of back pain shifts brain representation from nociceptive to emotional circuits. Brain 136, 2751–2768 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Ooi, L. Q. R. et al. Longer scans boost prediction and cut costs in brain-wide association studies. Nature 644, 731–740 (2025).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Patterson, K., Nestor, P. J. & Rogers, T. T. Where do you know what you know? The representation of semantic knowledge in the human brain. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 8, 976–987 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Setton, R., Mwilambwe-Tshilobo, L., Sheldon, S., Turner, G. R. & Spreng, R. N. Hippocampus and temporal pole functional connectivity is associated with age and individual differences in autobiographical memory. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 119, e2203039119 (2022).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Moulton, E. A. et al. Painful heat reveals hyperexcitability of the temporal pole in interictal and ictal migraine States. Cereb. Cortex 21, 435–448 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Branco, P. et al. Hippocampal functional connectivity after whiplash injury is linked to the development of chronic pain. Nat. Ment. Health 2, 1362–1370 (2024).

  35. Coghill, R. C., Sang, C. N., Maisog, J. M. & Iadarola, M. J. Pain intensity processing within the human brain: a bilateral, distributed mechanism. J. Neurophysiol. 82, 1934–1943 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Frot, M., Magnin, M., Mauguiere, F. & Garcia-Larrea, L. Cortical representation of pain in primary sensory-motor areas (S1/M1)—a study using intracortical recordings in humans. Hum. Brain Mapp. 34, 2655–2668 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Lynch, C. J. et al. Rapid precision functional mapping of individuals using multi-echo fMRI. Cell Rep. 33, 108540 (2020).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Apkarian, A. V. Pain perception in relation to emotional learning. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 18, 464–468 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Kim, J. et al. Somatotopically specific primary somatosensory connectivity to salience and default mode networks encodes clinical pain. Pain 160, 1594–1605 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Drysdale, A. T. et al. Resting-state connectivity biomarkers define neurophysiological subtypes of depression. Nat. Med. 23, 28–38 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. May, E. S. et al. Prefrontal gamma oscillations reflect ongoing pain intensity in chronic back pain patients. Hum. Brain Mapp. 40, 293–305 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Tang, J., LeBel, A., Jain, S. & Huth, A. G. Semantic reconstruction of continuous language from non-invasive brain recordings. Nat. Neurosci. 26, 858–866 (2023).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Saravanan, V., Berman, G. J. & Sober, S. J. Application of the hierarchical bootstrap to multi-level data in neuroscience. Neuron. Behav. Data Anal. Theory 3, 1–25 (2020).

  44. Lee, J.-J. & Woo, C. W. DEIPP. figshare https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.31064431 (2026).

  45. Lee, J.-J. et al. Repository for “Personalized Brain Decoding of Spontaneous Pain in Individuals With Chronic Pain”. GitHub https://github.com/cocoanlab/DEIPP (2025).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank all patients for their participation in this study. We thank J. Lee and S.-G. Kim for help with participant recruitment. We thank E.-J. Jeong, J. Han and Y. Park for help with conducting experiments. This work was supported by Institute for Basic Science (grant no. IBS-R015-D2 to C.-W.W.).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

J.-J.L. and C.-W.W. conceived and designed the experiment. S.J. and S.C. contributed to the experimental design, participant management and psychotherapy. J.-J.L. conducted the data analysis. J.-J.L. and C.-W.W. interpreted the results. J.-J.L. wrote the manuscript. C.-W.W. provided supervision and edited the manuscript. All authors reviewed and approved the final manuscript, except for S.J., who passed away in November 2023.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Choong-Wan Woo.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Neuroscience thanks Benjamin Becker, Markus Ploner and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Methods, Figs. 1–17, Table 1 and References.

Reporting Summary

Source data

Source Data Fig. 2

Source data for visualization.

Source Data Fig. 3

Source data for visualization.

Source Data Fig. 4

Source data for visualization.

Source Data Fig. 5

Source data for visualization.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lee, JJ., Jo, S., Cho, S. et al. Personalized brain decoding of spontaneous pain in individuals with chronic pain. Nat Neurosci (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41593-026-02221-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41593-026-02221-3

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing