Real-time functional magnetic resonance imaging neurofeedback training of amygdala upregulation increases affective flexibility in depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Decreased affective flexibility is associated with depression symptoms, and it has been suggested that common interventions may target this mechanism. To explore this hypothesis, we evaluated whether real-time functional magnetic resonance imaging neurofeedback (rtfMRI-nf) training to increase the amygdala responses during positive memory recall resulted in both symptom improvements, as has been observed previously, and flexibility to decrease amygdala reactivity in response to a cognitive task among patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). Methods: In a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial, adults with MDD received 2 sessions of rtfMRI-nf training to increase their amygdala (experimental group) or parietal (control group) responses during positive autobiographical memory recall. We evaluated signal changes in the amygdala during both the positive memory neurofeedback and a subsequent counting condition. Results: We included 38 adults with MDD, including 16 in the experimental group and 22 in the control group. In the experimental group, amygdala activity increased ( t > 2.01, df < 27, p < 0.05, d > 0.5) and depressive symptoms decreased (−8.57, 95 % confidence interval [CI] −15.12 to −2.59; t13 = −3.06, p = 0.009, d = 1). Amygdala activity during the count condition decreased after rtfMRI-nf (−0.16, 95 % CI −0.23 to −0.09; t396 = 4.73, p < 0.001, d = 0.48) and was correlated with decreased depression scores ( r = 0.46, p = 0.01). We replicated previous results and extended them to show decreased amygdala reactivity to a cognitive task during which no neurofeedback was provided. Limitations: The count condition was reported by participants as negative, but emotionality or accuracy during this condition was not assessed. Conclusion: These results suggest that nominally targeting unidimensional change in neural mechanisms could have implications for bidirectional control, increasing the likely reach and explanatory framework for how common depression interventions work. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02709161.
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 | 0.000 | 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".