Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36583397›Full record

SynthesisHuman brain mapping2023

Psychosocial factors and hippocampal subfields: The Medea-7T study.

Emma L Twait, Kim Blom, Huiberdina L Koek, Maarten H T Zwartbol, Rashid Ghaznawi, Jeroen Hendrikse, Lotte Gerritsen, Mirjam I Geerlings, UCC SMART Study Group

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Human brain mapping, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Frontiers in neuroanatomy · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Leveraging ultra-high field (7T) MRI in psychiatric research.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2024
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

9 authors.

Emma L TwaitDepartment of Epidemiology, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht and Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Kim BlomDepartment of Epidemiology, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht and Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Huiberdina L KoekDepartment of Geriatrics, University Medical Center Utrecht and Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Maarten H T ZwartbolDepartment of Radiology, University Medical Center Utrecht and Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Rashid GhaznawiDepartment of Radiology, University Medical Center Utrecht and Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Jeroen HendrikseDepartment of Radiology, University Medical Center Utrecht and Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Lotte GerritsenDepartment of Psychology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Mirjam I GeerlingsDepartment of Epidemiology, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht and Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4037-036X
UCC SMART Study Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Specific subfields within the hippocampus have shown vulnerability to chronic stress, highlighting the importance of looking regionally within the hippocampus to understand the role of psychosocial factors in the development of neurodegenerative diseases. A systematic review on psychosocial factors and hippocampal subfield volumes was performed and showed inconsistent results, highlighting the need for future studies to explore this relationship. The current study aimed to explore the association of psychosocial factors with hippocampal (subfield) volumes, using high-field 7T MRI. Data were from the Memory Depression and Aging (Medea)-7T study, which included 333 participants without dementia. Hippocampal subfields were automatically segmented from T2-weighted images using ASHS software. Generalized linear models accounting for correlated outcomes were used to assess the association between subfields (i.e., entorhinal cortex, subiculum, Cornu Ammonis [CA]1, CA2, CA3, dentate gyrus, and tail) and each psychosocial factor (i.e., depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, childhood maltreatment, recent stressful life events, and social support), adjusted for age, sex, and intracranial volume. Neither depression nor anxiety was associated with specific hippocampal (subfield) volumes. A trend for lower total hippocampal volume was found in those reporting childhood maltreatment, and a trend for higher total hippocampal volume was found in those who experienced a recent stressful life event. Among subfields, low social support was associated with lower volume in the CA3 (B = -0.43, 95% CI: -0.72; -0.15). This study suggests possible differential effects among hippocampal (subfield) volumes and psychosocial factors.

Indexed as

CA1 Region, HippocampalHippocampusAgingEntorhinal CortexHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingOrgan Sizeanxietydepressionearly life adversityhippocampusMRIpsychosocial

Identifiers

PMID36583397
PMCPMC9980899

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.