Convergent functional effects of antidepressants in major depressive disorder: a neuroimaging meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neuroimaging studies have provided valuable insights into the macroscale impacts of antidepressants on brain functions in patients with major depressive disorder. However, the findings of individual studies are inconsistent. Here, we aimed to provide a quantitative synthesis of the literature to identify convergence of the reported findings at both regional and network levels and to examine their associations with neurotransmitter systems. METHODS: Through a comprehensive search in PubMed and Scopus databases, we reviewed 5258 abstracts and identified 36 eligible functional neuroimaging studies on antidepressant effects in major depressive disorder. Activation likelihood estimation was used to investigate regional convergence of the reported foci of antidepressant effects, followed by functional decoding and connectivity mapping of the convergent clusters. Additionally, utilizing group-averaged data from the Human Connectome Project, we assessed convergent resting-state functional connectivity patterns of the reported foci. Next, we compared the convergent circuit with the circuits targeted by transcranial magnetic stimulation therapy. Last, we studied the association of regional and network-level convergence maps with selected neurotransmitter receptors/transporters maps. RESULTS: No regional convergence was found across foci of treatment-associated alterations in functional imaging. Subgroup analysis in the Treated > Untreated contrast revealed a convergent cluster in the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, which was associated with working memory and attention behavioral domains. Moreover, we found network-level convergence of the treatment-associated alterations in a circuit more prominent in the frontoparietal areas. This circuit was co-aligned with circuits targeted by "anti-subgenual" and "Beam F3" transcranial magnetic stimulation therapy. We observed no significant correlations between our meta-analytic findings with the maps of neurotransmitter receptors/transporters. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight the importance of the frontoparietal network and the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in the therapeutic effects of antidepressants, which may relate to their role in improving executive functions and emotional processing.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".