MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Adverse Life Experiences and Brain Function

2023· review· en· W4388140973 on OpenAlexaffabout
Niki Hosseini‐Kamkar, Mahdieh Varvani Farahani, Maja Nikolic, Kaycee Stewart, Samantha F. Goldsmith, Reza Rajabli, Cassandra J. Lowe, Andrew A. Nicholson, J. Bruce Morton, Marco Leyton

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Network Open · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalWestern UniversityMcGill UniversityRoyal Ottawa Mental Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsycINFOPsychologyFunctional magnetic resonance imagingMeta-analysisClinical psychologyMEDLINEAssociation (psychology)Data extractionNeuroimagingSystematic reviewWorking memoryFunctional neuroimagingCognitionCognitive psychologyMedicinePsychiatryNeurosciencePsychotherapistPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Adverse life experiences have been proposed to contribute to diverse mental health problems through an association with corticolimbic functioning. Despite compelling evidence from animal models, findings from studies in humans have been mixed; activation likelihood estimation (ALE) meta-analyses have failed to identify a consistent association of adverse events with brain function. Objective: To investigate the association of adversity exposure with altered brain reactivity using multilevel kernel density analyses (MKDA), a meta-analytic approach considered more robust than ALE to small sample sizes and methodological differences between studies. Data Sources: Searches were conducted using PsycInfo, Medline, EMBASE, and Web of Science from inception through May 4, 2022. The following search term combinations were used for each database: trauma, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), abuse, maltreatment, poverty, adversity, or stress; and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) or neuroimaging; and emotion, emotion regulation, memory, memory processing, inhibitory control, executive functioning, reward, or reward processing. Study Selection: Task-based fMRI studies within 4 domains (emotion processing, memory processing, inhibitory control, and reward processing) that included a measure of adverse life experiences and whole-brain coordinate results reported in Talairach or Montreal Neurological Institute space were included. Conference abstracts, books, reviews, meta-analyses, opinions, animal studies, articles not in English, and studies with fewer than 5 participants were excluded. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses reporting guideline, 2 independent reviewers assessed abstracts and full-text articles for entry criteria. A third reviewer resolved conflicts and errors in data extraction. Data were pooled using a random-effects model and data analysis occurred from August to November 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: Peak activation x-axis (left-right), y-axis (posterior-anterior), and z-axis (inferior-superior) coordinates were extracted from all studies and submitted to MKDA meta-analyses. Results: A total of 83 fMRI studies were included in the meta-analysis, yielding a combined sample of 5242 participants and 801 coordinates. Adversity exposure was associated with higher amygdala reactivity (familywise error rate corrected at P < .001; x-axis = 22; y-axis = -4; z-axis = -17) and lower prefrontal cortical reactivity (familywise error rate corrected at P < .001; x-axis = 10; y-axis = 60; z-axis = 10) across a range of task domains. These altered responses were only observed in studies that used adult participants and were clearest among those who had been exposed to severe threat and trauma. Conclusions and Relevance: In this meta-analysis of fMRI studies of adversity exposure and brain function, prior adversity exposure was associated with altered adult brain reactivity to diverse challenges. These results might better identify how adversity diminishes the ability to cope with later stressors and produces enduring susceptibility to mental health problems.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.269
GPT teacher head0.483
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations63
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA Network OpenSame topicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207