ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2024
Functional brain network dynamics of brooding in depression: insights from real-time fMRI neurofeedback.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2024. 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.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Brooding is a critical symptom and prognostic factor of major depressive disorder (MDD), which involves passively dwelling on self-referential dysphoria and related abstractions. The neurobiology of brooding remains under characterized. We aimed to elucidate neural dynamics underlying brooding, and explore their responses to neurofeedback intervention in MDD. Methods: We investigated functional MRI (fMRI) dynamic functional network connectivity (dFNC) in 36 MDD subjects and 26 healthy controls (HCs) during rest and brooding. Rest was measured before and after fMRI neurofeedback (MDD-active/sham: n=18/18, HC-active/sham: n=13/13). Baseline brooding severity was recorded using Ruminative Response Scale - Brooding subscale (RRS-B). Results: Four recurrent dFNC states were identified. Measures of time spent were not significantly different between MDD and HC for any of these states during brooding or rest. RRS-B scores in MDD showed significant negative correlation with measures of time spent in dFNC state 3 during brooding (r=-0.5, p= 1.7E-3, FDR-significant). This state comprises strong connections spanning several brain systems involved in sensory, attentional and cognitive processing. Time spent in this anti-brooding dFNC state significantly increased following neurofeedback only in the MDD active group (z=-2.09, p=0.037). Limitations: The sample size was small and imbalanced between groups. Brooding condition was not examined post-neurofeedback. Conclusion: We identified a densely connected anti-brooding dFNC brain state in MDD. MDD subjects spent significantly longer time in this state after active neurofeedback intervention, highlighting neurofeedback's potential for modulating dysfunctional brain dynamics to treat MDD.
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.