Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21664438›Full record

ArticleNeuroscience2011

Fear conditioning is associated with dynamic directed functional interactions between and within the human amygdala, hippocampus, and frontal lobe.

C C Liu, N E Crone, P J Franaszczuk, D T Cheng, D S Schretlen, F A Lenz

Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neuroscience, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03739645 (Physiological Studies in Healthy Subjects, Chronic Pain Patients and in Patients Undergoing Neurosurgical Procedures of Human Forebrain Mechanisms Mediating Somatic Sensation, Motor Control and Neurological Disorders), which is not on this map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03739645 naterminatednot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Physiological Studies in Healthy Subjects, Chronic Pain Patients and in Patients Undergoing Neurosurgical Procedures of Human Forebrain Mechanisms Mediating Somatic Sensation, Motor Control and Neurological Disorders

TypeinterventionalSponsorJohns Hopkins UniversityRan2020 to 2023Enrolled32ConditionsFear PainArmsSkin conductance levels and slopes over time in conditioned fear as metrics.as metrics for anxiety
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Aversive learning in adolescents: modulation by amygdala-prefrontal and amygdala-hippocampal connectivity and neuroticism.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2014
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

C C LiuDepartment of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21287-7713, USA.
N E Crone
P J Franaszczuk
D T Cheng
D S Schretlen
F A Lenz
Johns Hopkins University · US

Funding

Electrocorticographic studies of human cortical functionR01NS040596 · NINDS · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI CRONE, NATHAN E · 2001 to 2014
$6.7M
The Biology of Human Thalamo-Cortical Pain Related ActivityR01NS038493 · NINDS · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI LENZ, FRED · 1999 to 2015
$5.2M
The Transition from Pain Related Attention to VigilanceR56NS038493 · NINDS · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI LENZ, FRED · 2017 to 2017
$555k
NINDS NIH HHS NS38493NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS038493NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS040596NINDS NIH HHS R56 NS038493
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The current model of fear conditioning suggests that it is mediated through modules involving the amygdala (AMY), hippocampus (HIP), and frontal lobe (FL). We now test the hypothesis that habituation and acquisition stages of a fear conditioning protocol are characterized by different event-related causal interactions (ERCs) within and between these modules. The protocol used the painful cutaneous laser as the unconditioned stimulus and ERC was estimated by analysis of local field potentials recorded through electrodes implanted for investigation of epilepsy. During the prestimulus interval of the habituation stage FL>AMY ERC interactions were common. For comparison, in the poststimulus interval of the habituation stage, only a subdivision of the FL (dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, dlPFC) still exerted the FL>AMY ERC interaction (dlFC>AMY). For a further comparison, during the poststimulus interval of the acquisition stage, the dlPFC>AMY interaction persisted and an AMY>FL interaction appeared. In addition to these ERC interactions between modules, the results also show ERC interactions within modules. During the poststimulus interval, HIP>HIP ERC interactions were more common during acquisition, and deep hippocampal contacts exerted causal interactions on superficial contacts, possibly explained by connectivity between the perihippocampal gyrus and the HIP. During the prestimulus interval of the habituation stage, AMY>AMY ERC interactions were commonly found, while interactions between the deep and superficial AMY (indirect pathway) were independent of intervals and stages. These results suggest that the network subserving fear includes distributed or widespread modules, some of which are themselves "local networks." ERC interactions between and within modules can be either static or change dynamically across intervals or stages of fear conditioning.

Indexed as

Conditioning, ClassicalFearAdultAmygdalaEvoked PotentialsFemaleFrontal LobeHabituation, PsychophysiologicHippocampusHumansMale

Identifiers

PMID21664438
PMCPMC3150454
OpenAlexW2011355679

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.