Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25151915›Full record

ArticleBehaviour research and therapy2014

First steps in using machine learning on fMRI data to predict intrusive memories of traumatic film footage.

Ian A Clark, Katherine E Niehaus, Eugene P Duff, Martina C Di Simplicio, Gari D Clifford, Stephen M Smith, Clare E Mackay, Mark W Woolrich, Emily A Holmes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behaviour research and therapy, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Multiple memory systems, multiple time points: how science can inform treatment to control the expression of unwanted emotional memories.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2018
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Are there Special Mechanisms of Involuntary Memory?Review of philosophy and psychology · 2017
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. 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

9 authors.

Ian A ClarkUniversity Department of Psychiatry, Warneford Hospital, University of Oxford, United Kingdom.
Katherine E NiehausInstitute of Biomedical Engineering, Department of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, United Kingdom.
Eugene P DuffFMRIB Centre, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, United Kingdom.
Martina C Di SimplicioMedical Research Council Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, 15 Chaucer Road, Cambridge CB2 7EF, United Kingdom.
Gari D CliffordInstitute of Biomedical Engineering, Department of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, United Kingdom.
Stephen M SmithFMRIB Centre, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, United Kingdom.
Clare E MackayUniversity Department of Psychiatry, Warneford Hospital, University of Oxford, United Kingdom.
Mark W WoolrichOxford Centre for Human Brain Activity (OHBA), Department of Psychiatry, Warneford Hospital, University of Oxford, United Kingdom.
Emily A HolmesMedical Research Council Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, 15 Chaucer Road, Cambridge CB2 7EF, United Kingdom; Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. Electronic address: emily.holmes@mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC-A060-5PR50Medical Research Council MC_UP_0901/1Wellcome Trust 098369Wellcome Trust WT088217
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

After psychological trauma, why do some only some parts of the traumatic event return as intrusive memories while others do not? Intrusive memories are key to cognitive behavioural treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder, and an aetiological understanding is warranted. We present here analyses using multivariate pattern analysis (MVPA) and a machine learning classifier to investigate whether peri-traumatic brain activation was able to predict later intrusive memories (i.e. before they had happened). To provide a methodological basis for understanding the context of the current results, we first show how functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) during an experimental analogue of trauma (a trauma film) via a prospective event-related design was able to capture an individual's later intrusive memories. Results showed widespread increases in brain activation at encoding when viewing a scene in the scanner that would later return as an intrusive memory in the real world. These fMRI results were replicated in a second study. While traditional mass univariate regression analysis highlighted an association between brain processing and symptomatology, this is not the same as prediction. Using MVPA and a machine learning classifier, it was possible to predict later intrusive memories across participants with 68% accuracy, and within a participant with 97% accuracy; i.e. the classifier could identify out of multiple scenes those that would later return as an intrusive memory. We also report here brain networks key in intrusive memory prediction. MVPA opens the possibility of decoding brain activity to reconstruct idiosyncratic cognitive events with relevance to understanding and predicting mental health symptoms.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceAdolescentAdultBrainBrain MappingFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMemoryPhotic StimulationStress Disorders, Post-TraumaticYoung AdultFlashbackFunctional magnetic resonance imagingIntrusive memoriesMachine learningMental imageryMVPATrauma

Identifiers

PMID25151915
PMCPMC4222599

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.