MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112243235 · doi:10.1176/pn.39.6.0061

Brain Activation May Explain PTSD Flashbacks

2004· article· en· W2112243235 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joan Arehart-Treichel

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychiatric News · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySexual abusePosttraumatic stressPsychiatryRecallClinical psychologyMedicineInjury preventionPoison controlCognitive psychologyMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Back to table of contents Previous article Next article Clinical & Research NewsFull AccessBrain Activation May Explain PTSD FlashbacksJoan Arehart-TreichelJoan Arehart-TreichelSearch for more papers by this authorPublished Online:19 Mar 2004https://doi.org/10.1176/pn.39.6.0061When persons with posttraumatic stress disorder remember trauma, right areas of their brains tend to be activated, whereas when individuals without PTSD remember trauma, left areas of their brains are apt to be aroused, according to a study reported in the January American Journal of Psychiatry.The study was headed by Ruth Lanius, M.D., Ph.D., an assistant professor of psychiatry at the University of Western Ontario in London, Ontario, and an affiliate of the Robarts Research Institute.Lanius and her colleagues studied 11 persons who had developed PTSD as a result of sexual abuse/assault or of a motor vehicle accident, and 13 persons who had experienced sexual abuse/assault or a motor vehicle accident but did not develop PTSD as a result. All subjects were right-handed and of similar age, gender, and race.Each of these subjects was instructed to recall the traumatic event that he or she had experienced. While the subjects were recollecting, the scientists determined which areas of their brains were activated using functional magnetic resonance imaging and functional connectivity analyses. These permit assessment of the activity of a network of neurons across more than one area of the brain.The investigators found notable differences between the two groups when they compared the results. For example, subjects with PTSD showed more activation in certain right-brain areas—the right posterior cingulate gyrus, the right caudate, the right parietal lobe, and the right occipital lobe. Subjects without PTSD showed more activation in certain left-brain areas—the left superior frontal gyrus, the left anterior cingulated gyrus, the left caudate, the left parietal lobe, and the left insula.Lanius and her team suspect that this contrasting pattern of brain activation may help explain why PTSD patients tend to experience traumatic recall as flashbacks (spontaneous, vivid, usually visual memories unchanging over time) and why non-PTSD individuals are more apt to experience traumatic memories as verbal narratives.For example, the right parietal lobe is known to be involved in the nonverbal memory retrieval of events in people’s lives, so its activation while persons with PTSD are remembering distressing events may very well help explain why they recall these events as flashbacks. In contrast, the left brain areas activated by non-PTSD individuals when they recollect disturbing events are consistent with verbal episodic memory retrieval and may help explain why they remember such events as verbal narratives.“This is a fantastically interesting study,” Bessel van der Kolk, M.D., a professor of psychiatry at Boston University and medical director of the Trauma Center there, said in an interview. “Dr. Lanius has elegantly demonstrated how people’s brain function differs when they are in dissociate states. . . . We always suspected that when people go into these states, there is a decrease in activation of the left inferior prefrontal cortex—meaning that people are less capable of taking in new information and being curious about the world out there—and that the brain shifts to a more right posterior activation—more to a state of fear and flight.”Dutch scientists have also just published findings very similar to those of Lanius and her colleagues, van der Kolk pointed out, which gives added legitimacy to the findings of Lanius and her team.Van der Kolk said that he was pleased to see such studies being pursued by Canadian and European scientists.The study was financed by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Ontario Mental Health Foundation.The study, “The Nature of Traumatic Memories: A 4-T fMRI Functional Connectivity Analysis,” is posted online at http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/161/1/36?. ▪ Am J Psychiatry 2004 161 36 ISSUES NewArchived

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.227
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.303 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychiatric NewsSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207