Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25771686›Full record

ArticleBipolar disorders2015

Emotion regulation deficits in euthymic bipolar I versus bipolar II disorder: a functional and diffusion-tensor imaging study.

Xavier Caseras, Kevin Murphy, Natalia S Lawrence, Paola Fuentes-Claramonte, Jessica Watts, Derek K Jones, Mary L Phillips

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bipolar disorders, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
6.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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.

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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 101 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Moral emotion processing in euthymic bipolar disorder: insights from network analysis.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Normalization of impaired emotion inhibition in bipolar disorder mediated by cholinergic neurotransmission in the cingulate cortex.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Xavier CaserasMRC Centre for Neuropsychiatric Genetics and Genomics, Institute of Psychological Medicine and Clinical Neurosciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
Kevin MurphyNeuroscience and Mental Health Research Institute, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
Natalia S LawrenceMood Disorders Centre, School of Psychology, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Paola Fuentes-ClaramonteDepartament de Psicologia Bàsica, Clínica i Psicobiologia, School of Psychology, Universitat Jaume I de Castelló, Castello, Spain.
Jessica WattsMRC Centre for Neuropsychiatric Genetics and Genomics, Institute of Psychological Medicine and Clinical Neurosciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
Derek K JonesNeuroscience and Mental Health Research Institute, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
Mary L PhillipsMRC Centre for Neuropsychiatric Genetics and Genomics, Institute of Psychological Medicine and Clinical Neurosciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
Cardiff University · GBUniversitat Jaume I · ESUniversity of Exeter · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/L010305/1Wellcome Trust 096646
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesEmotion regulation deficits are a core feature of bipolar disorder. However, their potential neurobiological underpinnings and existence beyond bipolar I disorder remain unexplored. Our main goal was to investigate whether both individuals with bipolar I and bipolar II disorder show deficits in emotion regulation during an attention control task, and to explore the neurophysiological underpinnings of this potential deficit.

methodsTwenty healthy controls, 16 euthymic participants with bipolar I disorder, and 19 euthymic participants with bipolar II disorder completed psychometric and clinical assessments, a neuroimaging emotion regulation paradigm, and an anatomical diffusion-weighted scan. Groups were matched for age, gender, and verbal IQ.

resultsDuring the presence of emotional distracters, subjects with bipolar I disorder showed slowed reaction times to targets, and increased blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) responses in the amygdala, accumbens, and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, but not increased inverse functional connectivity between these prefrontal and subcortical areas, and altered white matter microstructure organization in the right uncinate fasciculus. Subjects with bipolar II disorder showed no altered reaction times, increased BOLD responses in the same brain areas, increased inverse functional connectivity between the prefrontal cortex and amygdala, and no abnormalities in white matter organization.

conclusionsParticipants with bipolar I disorder showed abnormalities in functional and anatomical connectivity between prefrontal cortices and subcortical structures in emotion regulation circuitry. However, these deficits did not extend to subjects with bipolar II disorder, suggesting fundamental differences in the pathophysiology of bipolar disorder subtypes.

Indexed as

EmotionsAdultAmygdalaAttentionBipolar DisorderBrainCase-Control StudiesDiffusion Tensor ImagingFemaleFunctional NeuroimagingHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedNucleus AccumbensPrefrontal Cortexbipolar disorderBOLDDTIemotion regulationfMRI

Identifiers

PMID25771686
PMCPMC4672703
OpenAlexW1965343364

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.