Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37650101›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2023

Self-regulation learning as active inference: dynamic causal modeling of an fMRI neurofeedback task.

Gabriela Vargas, David Araya, Pradyumna Sepulveda, Maria Rodriguez-Fernandez, Karl J Friston, Ranganatha Sitaram, Wael El-Deredy

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Effects of fMRI neurofeedback of right inferior frontal cortex on inhibitory brain activation in children with ADHD.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024
    Trial
  2. Mechanisms of brain self-regulation: psychological factors, mechanistic models and neural substrates.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024
    Review
  3. 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 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Gabriela VargasInstitute for Biological and Medical Engineering, Schools of Engineering, Medicine and Biological Sciences, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
David ArayaBrain Dynamics Lab, Universidad de Valparaíso, Valparaiso, Chile.
Pradyumna SepulvedaInstitute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Maria Rodriguez-FernandezInstitute for Biological and Medical Engineering, Schools of Engineering, Medicine and Biological Sciences, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Karl J FristonWellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Ranganatha SitaramSt. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN, United States.
Wael El-DeredyBrain Dynamics Lab, Universidad de Valparaíso, Valparaiso, Chile.
Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile · CLUniversity College London · GBArtificial Intelligence Research Institute · ESSt. Jude Children's Research Hospital · USUniversidad Andrés Bello · CL

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Learning to self-regulate brain activity by neurofeedback has been shown to lead to changes in the brain and behavior, with beneficial clinical and non-clinical outcomes. Neurofeedback uses a brain-computer interface to guide participants to change some feature of their brain activity. However, the neural mechanism of self-regulation learning remains unclear, with only 50% of the participants succeeding in achieving it. To bridge this knowledge gap, our study delves into the neural mechanisms of self-regulation learning via neurofeedback and investigates the brain processes associated with successful brain self-regulation. Methods: We study the neural underpinnings of self-regulation learning by employing dynamical causal modeling (DCM) in conjunction with real-time functional MRI data. The study involved a cohort of 18 participants undergoing neurofeedback training targeting the supplementary motor area. A critical focus was the comparison between top-down hierarchical connectivity models proposed by Active Inference and alternative bottom-up connectivity models like reinforcement learning. Results: Our analysis revealed a crucial distinction in brain connectivity patterns between successful and non-successful learners. Particularly, successful learners evinced a significantly stronger top-down effective connectivity towards the target area implicated in self-regulation. This heightened top-down network engagement closely resembles the patterns observed in goal-oriented and cognitive control studies, shedding light on the intricate cognitive processes intertwined with self-regulation learning. Discussion: The findings from our investigation underscore the significance of cognitive mechanisms in the process of self-regulation learning through neurofeedback. The observed stronger top-down effective connectivity in successful learners indicates the involvement of hierarchical cognitive control, which aligns with the tenets of Active Inference. This study contributes to a deeper understanding of the neural dynamics behind successful self-regulation learning and provides insights into the potential cognitive architecture underpinning this process.

Indexed as

Active Inferencebrain-computer interfacefMRIneurofeedbackself-regulation learning

Identifiers

PMID37650101
PMCPMC10465165
OpenAlexW4385856870

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.