Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27829086›Full record

SynthesisJAMA psychiatry2017

Altered Brain Activity in Unipolar Depression Revisited: Meta-analyses of Neuroimaging Studies.

Veronika I Müller, Edna C Cieslik, Ilinca Serbanescu, Angela R Laird, Peter T Fox, Simon B Eickhoff

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JAMA psychiatry, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 144 papers, 42 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
144citing papers in PubMed, 42 pooled it
19.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

144 citing papers in PubMed, 42 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 313 citations in OpenAlex.

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

84 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Veronika I MüllerInstitute of Clinical Neuroscience and Medical Psychology, Medical Faculty, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Germany2Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-1), Research Centre Jülich, Jülich, Germany.
Edna C CieslikInstitute of Clinical Neuroscience and Medical Psychology, Medical Faculty, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Germany2Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-1), Research Centre Jülich, Jülich, Germany.
Ilinca SerbanescuInstitute of Clinical Neuroscience and Medical Psychology, Medical Faculty, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Angela R LairdDepartment of Physics, Florida International University, Miami.
Peter T FoxResearch Imaging Institute, University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio5Research Service, South Texas Veterans Administration Medical Center, San Antonio6State Key Laboratory for Brain and Cognitive Sciences, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Simon B EickhoffInstitute of Clinical Neuroscience and Medical Psychology, Medical Faculty, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Germany2Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-1), Research Centre Jülich, Jülich, Germany.
Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf · DEFlorida International University · USThe University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio · US

Funding

Meta-anaylsis in human brain mappingR01MH074457 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCIENCE CENTER · PI FOX, PETER THORNTON · 2006 to 2024
$10.5M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH074457
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importanceDuring the past 20 years, numerous neuroimaging experiments have investigated aberrant brain activation during cognitive and emotional processing in patients with unipolar depression (UD). The results of those investigations, however, vary considerably; moreover, previous meta-analyses also yielded inconsistent findings.

objectiveTo readdress aberrant brain activation in UD as evidenced by neuroimaging experiments on cognitive and/or emotional processing. DATA SOURCES: Neuroimaging experiments published from January 1, 1997, to October 1, 2015, were identified by a literature search of PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar using different combinations of the terms fMRI (functional magnetic resonance imaging), PET (positron emission tomography), neural, major depression, depression, major depressive disorder, unipolar depression, dysthymia, emotion, emotional, affective, cognitive, task, memory, working memory, inhibition, control, n-back, and Stroop. STUDY SELECTION: Neuroimaging experiments (using fMRI or PET) reporting whole-brain results of group comparisons between adults with UD and healthy control individuals as coordinates in a standard anatomic reference space and using an emotional or/and cognitive challenging task were selected. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Coordinates reported to show significant activation differences between UD and healthy controls during emotional or cognitive processing were extracted. By using the revised activation likelihood estimation algorithm, different meta-analyses were calculated. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Meta-analyses tested for brain regions consistently found to show aberrant brain activation in UD compared with controls. Analyses were calculated across all emotional processing experiments, all cognitive processing experiments, positive emotion processing, negative emotion processing, experiments using emotional face stimuli, experiments with a sex discrimination task, and memory processing. All meta-analyses were calculated across experiments independent of reporting an increase or decrease of activity in major depressive disorder. For meta-analyses with a minimum of 17 experiments available, separate analyses were performed for increases and decreases.

resultsIn total, 57 studies with 99 individual neuroimaging experiments comprising in total 1058 patients were included; 34 of them tested cognitive and 65 emotional processing. Overall analyses across cognitive processing experiments (P > .29) and across emotional processing experiments (P > .47) revealed no significant results. Similarly, no convergence was found in analyses investigating positive (all P > .15), negative (all P > .76), or memory (all P > .48) processes. Analyses that restricted inclusion of confounds (eg, medication, comorbidity, age) did not change the results. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Inconsistencies exist across individual experiments investigating aberrant brain activity in UD and replication problems across previous neuroimaging meta-analyses. For individual experiments, these inconsistencies may relate to use of uncorrected inference procedures, differences in experimental design and contrasts, or heterogeneous clinical populations; meta-analytically, differences may be attributable to varying inclusion and exclusion criteria or rather liberal statistical inference approaches.

Indexed as

Functional NeuroimagingMagnetic Resonance ImagingAdultArousalBrainBrain MappingCognitionDepressive DisorderEmotionsHumansLikelihood FunctionsMajor Depressive DisorderReference ValuesSynaptic Transmission

Identifiers

PMID27829086
PMCPMC5293141
OpenAlexW2550495677

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.