MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389151592 · doi:10.3389/fnins.2023.1229729

A tale of two targets: examining the differential effects of posterior cingulate cortex- and amygdala-targeted fMRI-neurofeedback in a PTSD pilot study

2023· article· en· W4389151592 on OpenAlexafffund
Jonathan M. Lieberman, Daniela Rabellino, Maria Densmore, Paul Frewen, David Steyrl, Frank Scharnowski, Jean Théberge, Niki Hosseini‐Kamkar, Richard W. J. Neufeld, Rakesh Jetly, Benício N. Frey, Tomas Ros, Ruth A. Lanius, Andrew A. Nicholson

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neuroscience · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonUniversity of British ColumbiaRoyal Ottawa Mental Health CentreUniversity of OttawaSt Joseph's Health CareWestern UniversityMcMaster UniversityLawson Health Research Institute
FundersCanadian Institute for Military and Veteran Health ResearchCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchEuropean Commission
KeywordsNeurofeedbackPosterior cingulateAmygdalaNeuroscienceCingulate cortexPsychologyAnterior cingulate cortexFunctional connectivityCortex (anatomy)ElectroencephalographyCognitionCentral nervous system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Real-time fMRI-based neurofeedback (rt-fMRI-NFB) is a non-invasive technology that enables individuals to self-regulate brain activity linked to neuropsychiatric symptoms, including those associated with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Selecting the target brain region for neurofeedback-mediated regulation is primarily informed by the neurobiological characteristics of the participant population. There is a strong link between PTSD symptoms and multiple functional disruptions in the brain, including hyperactivity within both the amygdala and posterior cingulate cortex (PCC) during trauma-related processing. As such, previous rt-fMRI-NFB studies have focused on these two target regions when training individuals with PTSD to regulate neural activity. However, the differential effects of neurofeedback target selection on PTSD-related neural activity and clinical outcomes have not previously been investigated. Methods: = 14) while viewing personalized trauma words. Results: For the PCC as compared to the amygdala group, we observed decreased neural activity in several regions implicated in PTSD psychopathology - namely, the bilateral cuneus/precuneus/primary visual cortex, the left superior parietal lobule, the left occipital pole, and the right superior temporal gyrus/temporoparietal junction (TPJ) - during target region downregulation using rt-fMRI-NFB. Conversely, for the amygdala as compared to the PCC group, there were no unique (i.e., over and above that of the PCC group) decreases in neural activity. Importantly, amygdala downregulation was not associated with significantly improved PTSD symptoms, whereas PCC downregulation was associated with reduced reliving and distress symptoms over the course of this single training session. In this pilot analysis, we did not detect significant between-group differences in state PTSD symptoms during neurofeedback. As a critical control, the PCC and amygdala groups did not differ in their ability to downregulate activity within their respective target brain regions. This indicates that subsequent whole-brain neural activation results can be attributed to the effects of the neurofeedback target region selection in terms of neurophysiological function, rather than as a result of group differences in regulatory success. Conclusion: In this study, neurofeedback-mediated downregulation of the PCC was differentially associated with reduced state PTSD symptoms and simultaneous decreases in PTSD-associated brain activity during a single training session. This novel analysis may guide researchers in choosing a neurofeedback target region in future rt-fMRI-NFB studies and help to establish the clinical efficacy of specific neurofeedback targets for PTSD. A future multi-session clinical trial of rt-fMRI-NFB that directly compares between PCC and amygdala target regions is warranted.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score0.657

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations19
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeuroscienceSame topicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207