Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28769749›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2017

Attention, in and Out: Scalp-Level and Intracranial EEG Correlates of Interoception and Exteroception.

Indira García-Cordero, Sol Esteves, Ezequiel P Mikulan, Eugenia Hesse, Fabricio H Baglivo, Walter Silva, María Del Carmen García, Esteban Vaucheret, Carlos Ciraolo, Hernando S García and 10 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  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

20 authors.

Indira García-CorderoLaboratory of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience, Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience, INECO Foundation, Favaloro UniversityBuenos Aires, Argentina.
Sol EstevesLaboratory of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience, Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience, INECO Foundation, Favaloro UniversityBuenos Aires, Argentina.
Ezequiel P MikulanLaboratory of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience, Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience, INECO Foundation, Favaloro UniversityBuenos Aires, Argentina.
Eugenia HesseLaboratory of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience, Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience, INECO Foundation, Favaloro UniversityBuenos Aires, Argentina.
Fabricio H BaglivoLaboratory of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience, Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience, INECO Foundation, Favaloro UniversityBuenos Aires, Argentina.
Walter SilvaPrograma de Cirugía de Epilepsia, Hospital Italiano de Buenos AiresBuenos Aires, Argentina.
María Del Carmen GarcíaPrograma de Cirugía de Epilepsia, Hospital Italiano de Buenos AiresBuenos Aires, Argentina.
Esteban VaucheretPrograma de Cirugía de Epilepsia, Hospital Italiano de Buenos AiresBuenos Aires, Argentina.
Carlos CiraoloPrograma de Cirugía de Epilepsia, Hospital Italiano de Buenos AiresBuenos Aires, Argentina.
Hernando S GarcíaLaboratory of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience, Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience, INECO Foundation, Favaloro UniversityBuenos Aires, Argentina.
Federico AdolfiLaboratory of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience, Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience, INECO Foundation, Favaloro UniversityBuenos Aires, Argentina.
Marcos PiettoNational Scientific and Technical Research CouncilBuenos Aires, Argentina.
Eduar HerreraLaboratory of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience, Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience, INECO Foundation, Favaloro UniversityBuenos Aires, Argentina.
Agustina LegazLaboratory of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience, Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience, INECO Foundation, Favaloro UniversityBuenos Aires, Argentina.
Facundo ManesLaboratory of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience, Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience, INECO Foundation, Favaloro UniversityBuenos Aires, Argentina.
Adolfo M GarcíaLaboratory of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience, Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience, INECO Foundation, Favaloro UniversityBuenos Aires, Argentina.
Mariano SigmanLaboratory of Neuroscience, Universidad Torcuato Di TellaBuenos Aires, Argentina.
Tristán A BekinschteinLaboratory of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience, Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience, INECO Foundation, Favaloro UniversityBuenos Aires, Argentina.
Agustín IbáñezLaboratory of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience, Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience, INECO Foundation, Favaloro UniversityBuenos Aires, Argentina.
Lucas SedeñoLaboratory of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience, Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience, INECO Foundation, Favaloro UniversityBuenos Aires, Argentina.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Interoception, the monitoring of visceral signals, is often presumed to engage attentional mechanisms specifically devoted to inner bodily sensing. In fact, most standardized interoceptive tasks require directing attention to internal signals. However, most studies in the field have failed to compare attentional modulations between internally- and externally-driven processes, thus probing blind to the specificity of the former. Here we address this issue through a multidimensional approach combining behavioral measures, analyses of event-related potentials and functional connectivity via high-density electroencephalography, and intracranial recordings. In Study 1, 50 healthy volunteers performed a heartbeat detection task as we recorded modulations of the heartbeat-evoked potential (HEP) in three conditions: exteroception, basal interoception (also termed interoceptive accuracy), and post-feedback interoception (sometimes called interoceptive learning). In Study 2, to evaluate whether key interoceptive areas (posterior insula, inferior frontal gyrus, amygdala, and somatosensory cortex) were differentially modulated by externally- and internally-driven processes, we analyzed human intracranial recordings with depth electrodes in these regions. This unique technique provides a very fine grained spatio-temporal resolution compared to other techniques, such as EEG or fMRI. We found that both interoceptive conditions in Study 1 yielded greater HEP amplitudes than the exteroceptive one. In addition, connectivity analysis showed that post-feedback interoception, relative to basal interoception, involved enhanced long-distance connections linking frontal and posterior regions. Moreover, results from Study 2 showed a differentiation between oscillations during basal interoception (broadband: 35-110 Hz) and exteroception (1-35 Hz) in the insula, the amygdala, the somatosensory cortex, and the inferior frontal gyrus. In sum, this work provides convergent evidence for the specificity and dynamics of attentional mechanisms involved in interoception.

Indexed as

exteroceptionheart evoked potentialinteroceptioninteroceptive learningintracranial recordings

Identifiers

PMID28769749
PMCPMC5515904

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.