Local Neuronal Synchronization in Frequent Nightmare Recallers and Healthy Controls: A Resting-State Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nightmares are highly dysphoric dreams that are well-remembered upon awakening. Frequent nightmares have been associated with psychopathology and emotional dysregulation, yet their neural mechanisms remain largely unknown. Our neurocognitive model posits that nightmares reflect dysfunction in a limbic-prefrontal circuit comprising medial prefrontal and anterior cingulate cortices, hippocampus, and amygdala. However, there is a paucity of studies that used brain imaging to directly test the neural correlates of nightmares. One such study compared the regional homogeneity (ReHo) of resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging blood-oxygen level-dependent signals between frequent nightmare recallers and controls. The main results were greater regional homogeneity in the left anterior cingulate cortex and right inferior parietal lobule for the nightmare recallers than for the controls. In the present study, we aimed to document the ReHo correlates of frequent nightmares using several nightmare severity measures. We acquired resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging data from 18 frequent nightmare recallers aged 18-35 (3 males and 15 females) and 18 age- and sex-matched controls, as well as retrospective and prospective disturbed dreaming frequency estimates and scores on the Nightmare Distress Questionnaire. While there were inconsistent results for our different analyses (group comparisons, correlational analyses for frequency estimates/Nightmare Distress scores), our results suggest that nightmares are associated with altered ReHo in frontal (medial prefrontal and inferior frontal), parietal, temporal and occipital regions, as well as some subcortical regions (thalamus). We also found a positive correlation between retrospective disturbed dreaming frequency estimates and ReHo values in the hippocampus. These findings are mostly in line with a recent SPECT study from our laboratory. Our results point to the possibility that a variety of regions, including but not limited to the limbic-prefrontal circuit of our neurocognitive model, contribute to nightmare formation.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".