ArticleScientific reports2024
Neural processing of sad and happy autobiographical memories in women with depression and borderline personality disorder.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and borderline personality disorder (BPD) are reported to have disrupted autobiographical memory (AM). Using functional magnetic resonance imaging we investigated behavioral and neural processing of the recall of emotional (sad and happy) memories in 30 MDD, 18 BPD, and 34 healthy control (HC) unmedicated women. The behavioral results showed that the MDD group experienced more sadness than the HC after the sad recall, while BPD participants experienced less happiness than HC after the happy recall. The fMRI results for sad AMs, compared to happy AMs, elicited greater activation in multiple brain regions (i.e., medial prefrontal cortex, posterior cingulate cortex, insula) linked to self-related information, emotional processing, and semantic recollection across all groups. Functional connectivity analysis revealed a significant main effect of group between the occipital cortex and precuneus and between occipital cortex and posterior cingulate cortex. The effect was driven by stronger connectivity between the occipital cortex and precuneus in the clinical groups taken together than in the HC. Our results suggest a need for stronger coordination between visual imagery and contextual recall for vivid memory retrieval in these clinical groups.
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.