Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25578799›Full record

ArticleNeuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology2015

Hippocampal-dorsolateral prefrontal coupling as a species-conserved cognitive mechanism: a human translational imaging study.

Florian Bähner, Charmaine Demanuele, Janina Schweiger, Martin F Gerchen, Vera Zamoscik, Kai Ueltzhöffer, Tim Hahn, Patric Meyer, Herta Flor, Daniel Durstewitz and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed
–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

37 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

14 authors.

Florian Bähner1] Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience Heidelberg-Mannheim, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany [2] Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Charmaine Demanuele1] Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience Heidelberg-Mannheim, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany [2] Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Janina SchweigerDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Martin F Gerchen1] Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience Heidelberg-Mannheim, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany [2] Department of Clinical Psychology, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Vera ZamoscikDepartment of Clinical Psychology, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Kai Ueltzhöffer1] Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience Heidelberg-Mannheim, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany [2] Department of Psychology, Goethe University, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Tim HahnDepartment of Psychology, Goethe University, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Patric Meyer1] Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience Heidelberg-Mannheim, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany [2] Institute of Cognitive and Clinical Neuroscience, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Herta Flor1] Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience Heidelberg-Mannheim, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany [2] Institute of Cognitive and Clinical Neuroscience, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Daniel Durstewitz1] Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience Heidelberg-Mannheim, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany [2] Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Heike TostDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Peter Kirsch1] Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience Heidelberg-Mannheim, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany [2] Department of Clinical Psychology, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Michael M PlichtaDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Andreas Meyer-Lindenberg1] Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience Heidelberg-Mannheim, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany [2] Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hippocampal-prefrontal cortex (HC-PFC) interactions are implicated in working memory (WM) and altered in psychiatric conditions with cognitive impairment such as schizophrenia. While coupling between both structures is crucial for WM performance in rodents, evidence from human studies is conflicting and translation of findings is complicated by the use of differing paradigms across species. We therefore used functional magnetic resonance imaging together with a spatial WM paradigm adapted from rodent research to examine HC-PFC coupling in humans. A PFC-parietal network was functionally connected to hippocampus (HC) during task stages requiring high levels of executive control but not during a matched control condition. The magnitude of coupling in a network comprising HC, bilateral dorsolateral PFC (DLPFC), and right supramarginal gyrus explained one-fourth of the variability in an independent spatial WM task but was unrelated to visual WM performance. HC-DLPFC coupling may thus represent a systems-level mechanism specific to spatial WM that is conserved across species, suggesting its utility for modeling cognitive dysfunction in translational neuroscience.

Indexed as

Brain MappingAdultCognitionFemaleFunctional LateralityHippocampusHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMemory, Short-TermNeural PathwaysNeuropsychological TestsOxygenPrefrontal CortexRestOxygen

Identifiers

PMID25578799
PMCPMC4915249

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.