MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164876957 · doi:10.1503/jpn.130223

Impaired right inferior frontal gyrus response to contextual cues in male veterans with PTSD during response inhibition

2014· article· en· W2164876957 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sanne J.H. van Rooij, Arthur R. Rademaker, Mitzy Kennis, Matthijs Vink, René S. Kahn, Elbert Geuze

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinisterie van Defensie
KeywordsAnticipation (artificial intelligence)PsychologyResponse inhibitionComorbiditySuperior frontal gyrusInferior frontal gyrusCognitionBehavioral inhibitionClinical psychologyAudiologyPsychiatryMedicineAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is often associated with impaired fear inhibition and decreased safety cue processing; however, studies capturing the cognitive aspect of inhibition and contextual cue processing are limited. In this fMRI study, the role of contextual cues in response inhibition was investigated. METHODS: Male medication-naive war veterans with PTSD, male control veterans (combat controls) and healthy nonmilitary men (healthy controls) underwent fMRI while performing the stop-signal anticipation task (SSAT). The SSAT evokes 2 forms of response inhibition: reactive inhibition (outright stopping) and proactive inhibition (anticipation of stopping based on contextual cues). RESULTS: We enrolled 28 veterans with PTSD, 26 combat controls and 25 healthy controls in our study. Reduced reactive inhibition was observed in all veterans, both with and without PTSD, but not in nonmilitary controls, whereas decreased inhibition of the left pre/postcentral gyrus appeared to be specifically associated with PTSD. Impaired behavioural proactive inhibition was also specific to PTSD. Furthermore, the PTSD group showed a reduced right inferior frontal gyrus response during proactive inhibition compared with the combat control group. LIMITATIONS: Most patients with PTSD had comorbid psychiatric disorders, but such comorbidity is common in patients with PTSD. Also, the education level (estimate of intelligence) of participants, but not of their parents, differed among the groups. CONCLUSION: Our findings of reduced proactive inhibition imply that patients with PTSD show reduced contextual cue processing. These results complement previous findings on fear inhibition and demonstrate that contextual cue processing in patients with PTSD is also reduced during cognitive processes, indicating a more general deficit.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.537
Threshold uncertainty score0.498

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.301 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations75
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Psychiatry and NeuroscienceSame topicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207