Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27075438›Full record

Trial reportSocial cognitive and affective neuroscience2016

Differential effects of rumination and distraction on ketamine induced modulation of resting state functional connectivity and reactivity of regions within the default-mode network.

Mick Lehmann, Erich Seifritz, Anke Henning, Martin Walter, Heinz Böker, Milan Scheidegger, Simone Grimm

Open access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Social cognitive and affective neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Towards an expanded neurocognitive account of ketamine's rapid antidepressant effects.The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology · 2025
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Mick LehmannDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Psychiatric Hospital, University of Zurich, Zurich, 8032, Switzerland Department of Biopsychology, University of Zurich, Zurich, 8050, Switzerland ETH Zurich, Neuroscience Center, Zurich, 8057, Switzerland mick.lehmann@uzh.ch.
Erich SeifritzDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Psychiatric Hospital, University of Zurich, Zurich, 8032, Switzerland ETH Zurich, Neuroscience Center, Zurich, 8057, Switzerland.
Anke HenningInstitute for Biomedical Engineering, ETH Zurich, Switzerland.
Martin WalterDepartment of Psychiatry, Otto-von-Guericke University, Magdeburg, Germany Department of Behavioral Neurology, Leibniz Institute for Neurobiology, Magdeburg, 39106, Germany Clinical Affective Neuroimaging Laboratory (CANLAB), Center for Behavioral and Brain Sciences, CBBS, 39120 Magdeburg, Germany Department of Psychiatry University Tuebingen, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany.
Heinz BökerDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Psychiatric Hospital, University of Zurich, Zurich, 8032, Switzerland.
Milan ScheideggerDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Psychiatric Hospital, University of Zurich, Zurich, 8032, Switzerland Institute for Biomedical Engineering, ETH Zurich, Switzerland.
Simone GrimmDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Psychiatric Hospital, University of Zurich, Zurich, 8032, Switzerland Department of Psychiatry, Charité, CBF, 12203 Berlin, Germany.
University of Zurich · CHCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DEETH Zurich · CHOtto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Distraction and rumination are distinct response styles that determine how an individual deals with negative thoughts and feelings. Rumination is accompanied by an elevated self-focus, which is associated with increased resting state functional connectivity and decreased reactivity within the default mode network. Interestingly, the NMDA receptor antagonist ketamine reduces functional connectivity in this network, while its effects on blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) responses during stimulus perception are not known. Ketamine might lead to a more variable processing of the external world with an attenuated self-focus by reducing the resting state connectivity. Here, we used an emotional picture-viewing task in combination with functional magnetic resonance imaging to test the hypothesis that a single ketamine administration to healthy subjects increases BOLD reactivity to negative stimuli. We found a region specific increase in BOLD reactivity in the pregenual anterior cingulate cortex and not in a posterior control region after ketamine compared with placebo administration. Moreover, a linear regression revealed that the increase in BOLD reactivity was more pronounced for subjects with a low ability to apply distraction during negative experiences. Our results implicate that ketamine attenuates a potentially pathological increased self-focus during negative experiences.

Indexed as

AdultAttentionConnectomeExcitatory Amino Acid AntagonistsGyrus CinguliHumansKetamineMagnetic Resonance ImagingMiddle AgedThinkingExcitatory Amino Acid AntagonistsKetamineDMNfMRIketamineresponse stylesresting state connectivity

Identifiers

PMID27075438
PMCPMC4967796
OpenAlexW2340624388

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.