ArticlePloS one2023
Inhibitory control and its modification in spider phobia - Study protocol for an antisaccade training trial.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesInhibitory control deficits are considered a key pathogenic factor in anxiety disorders. To assess inhibitory control, the antisaccade task is a well-established measure that assesses antisaccade performance via latencies and error rates. The present study follows three aims: (1) to investigate inhibitory control via antisaccade latencies and errors in an antisaccade task, and their associations with multiple measures of fear in patients with spider phobia (SP) versus healthy controls (HC), (2) to investigate the modifiability of antisaccade performance via a fear-specific antisaccade training in patients with SP and HC, and (3) to explore associations between putative training-induced changes in antisaccade performance in SPs and changes in diverse measures of fear.
methodsTowards aim 1, we assess antisaccade latencies (primary outcome) and error rates (secondary outcome) in an emotional antisaccade task. Further, the baseline assessment includes assessments of psychophysiological, behavioral, and psychometric indices of fear in patients with SP and HCs. To address aim 2, we compare effects of a fear-specific antisaccade training with effects of a prosaccade training as a control condition. The primary and secondary outcomes are reassessed at a post-1-assessment in both SPs and HCs. Aim 3 employs a cross-over design and is piloted in patients with SP, only. Towards this aim, primary and secondary outcomes, as well as psychophysiological, behavioral, and psychometric measures of fear are reassessed at a post-2-assessment after the second training block.
conclusionThis study aims to better understand inhibitory control processes and their modifiability in spider phobia. If successful, antisaccade training may assist in the treatment of specific phobia by directly targeting the putative underlying inhibitory control deficits. This study has been preregistered with ISRCTN (ID: ISRCTN12918583) on 28th February 2022.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.