Chronic pain is the greatest source of disability globally and claims related to chronic pain feature in many insurance and medico-legal cases. Brain imaging (for example, functional MRI, PET, EEG and magnetoencephalography) is widely considered to have potential for diagnosis, prognostication, and prediction of treatment outcome in patients with chronic pain. In this Consensus Statement, a presidential task force of the International Association for the Study of Pain examines the capabilities of brain imaging in the diagnosis of chronic pain, and the ethical and legal implications of its use in this way. The task force emphasizes that the use of brain imaging in this context is in a discovery phase, but has the potential to increase our understanding of the neural underpinnings of chronic pain, inform the development of therapeutic agents, and predict treatment outcomes for use in personalized pain management. The task force proposes standards of evidence that must be satisfied before any brain imaging measure can be considered suitable for clinical or legal purposes. The admissibility of such evidence in legal cases also strongly depends on laws that vary between jurisdictions. For these reasons, the task force concludes that the use of brain imaging findings to support or dispute a claim of chronic pain — effectively as a pain lie detector — is not warranted, but that imaging should be used to further our understanding of the mechanisms underlying pain.

慢性疼痛是全球范围内最大的残疾来源，在许多保险和医疗法律案件中，与慢性疼痛有关的索赔都存在。脑成像（例如，功能性MRI，PET，EEG和脑磁图）被广泛认为具有诊断，预后和预测慢性疼痛患者治疗结果的潜力。在这份共识声明中，国际疼痛研究协会的主席工作组研究了脑成像在诊断慢性疼痛中的能力，以及以这种方式使用脑成像的伦理和法律意义。专责小组强调，在这种情况下使用脑成像技术尚处于发现阶段，但有可能增进我们对慢性疼痛的神经基础的了解，有助于开发治疗剂，并预测用于个性化疼痛管理的治疗结果。工作队提出了证据标准，必须先满足这些证据标准，然后才能认为任何脑部成像措施都适合于临床或法律目的。此类证据在法律案件中的可采性在很大程度上还取决于不同司法管辖区之间法律的差异。出于这些原因，工作队得出结论认为，没有必要使用脑部影像学检查结果来支持或质疑慢性疼痛的主张（有效地作为疼痛测谎仪），但应使用影像学来进一步理解基础机制。疼痛。此类证据在法律案件中的可采性在很大程度上还取决于不同司法管辖区之间法律的差异。出于这些原因，工作队得出结论认为，没有必要使用脑部影像学检查结果来支持或质疑慢性疼痛的主张（有效地作为疼痛测谎仪），但应使用影像学来进一步理解基础机制。疼痛。此类证据在法律案件中的可采性在很大程度上还取决于不同司法管辖区之间法律的差异。出于这些原因，工作队得出结论认为，没有必要使用脑部影像学检查结果来支持或质疑慢性疼痛的主张（有效地作为疼痛测谎仪），但应使用影像学来进一步理解基础机制。疼痛。