Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32189178›Full record

SynthesisNeuropsychology review2020

Cerebellar Contributions to Proactive and Reactive Control in the Stop Signal Task: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Studies.

Sarah V Clark, Tricia Z King, Jessica A Turner

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Neuropsychology review, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sarah V ClarkDepartment of Psychology, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, 30303, USA. sclark55@student.gsu.edu.
Tricia Z KingDepartment of Psychology, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, 30303, USA.
Jessica A TurnerDepartment of Psychology, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, 30303, USA.
Georgia State University · US

Funding

Mining the Genomewide Scan: Genetic Profiles of Structural Loss in Schizophrenia: AD/ADRD supplementR01MH094524 · NIMH · THE MIND RESEARCH NETWORK · PI CALHOUN, VINCE D, TURNER, JESS · 2012 to 2021
$6.3M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH094524
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The cerebellum facilitates and modulates cognitive functions using forward and inverse internal models to predict and control behavior, respectively. Despite neuroimaging evidence that regions of the cerebellum are active during executive function (EF) tasks in general, little is known about the cerebellum's role in specific EFs and their underlying neural networks. Inhibitory control specifically may be facilitated by cerebellar internal models predicting responses during proactive control (withholding), and controlling responses during reactive control (inhibiting). The stop signal task (SST) is an inhibitory control task often used in neuroimaging studies to measure neural responses to both proactive and reactive control. Thus, in this review, we examine evidence for the cerebellum's role in inhibitory control by reviewing studies of healthy adults that utilized the SST in event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) experiments. Twenty-one studies that demonstrated cerebellar results were eligible for review, including 749 participants, 28 contrasts, and 38 cerebellar clusters. We also performed activation likelihood estimation (ALE) meta-analysis of contrasts derived from reviewed studies. This review illustrates evidence for the cerebellum participating in inhibitory control independent of motor control. Most significant cerebellar clusters were located in the left posterior cerebellum, suggesting that it communicates with the established cortical right-lateralized inhibitory control network. Cerebellar activity was most consistently observed for contrasts that measured proactive control, and ALE analysis confirmed that left Crus I is most likely to be activated in studies of proactive control measuring monitoring and anticipation. Results suggest that the left posterior cerebellum may communicate with right frontal and parietal cortices, using forward models to predict appropriate responses. Reactive control contrasts indicated a possible role for cerebellar regions in enhancing inhibition efficiency through inverse models, but ALE meta-analysis did not confirm this hypothesis. Limitations in the current literature, clinical implications, and directions for future research are discussed.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingPsychomotor PerformanceAdultBrain MappingCerebellumCognitionFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedInhibition, PsychologicalMaleNerve NetCerebellumExecutive functionfMRIInhibitory controlResponse inhibitionStop signal

Identifiers

PMID32189178
OpenAlexW3011634618

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.