SynthesisPsychological medicine2025
Neural systems underlying autobiographical memory dysregulations in depression: A neuroimaging meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Psychological medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- History of childhood trauma enhances the detrimental effects of recent stressors on brain structure and function in major depressive disorder.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2026Article
- Functional Breakdown of Temporoparietal Junction Interaction in High-depression Individuals: Evidence from Multi-Metric Connectomics.Brain structure & function · 2026Article
- Aberrant Salience Network Functional Connectivity in Resting-State and Fear-Related Autobiographical Memory Recall in Female Adolescents with Borderline Personality Disorder.Brain sciences · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Autobiographical memory (AM) dysfunction has been proposed as a neurocognitive mechanism underlying the development and maintenance of depression. However, case-control neuroimaging studies investigating the neural correlates of AM in depression have yielded inconsistent findings. The present study utilized neuroimaging meta-analyses to identify robust neural markers of AM dysfunction in depression and characterize the associated behavioral and network-level mechanisms. A preregistered neuroimaging meta-analysis (https://osf.io/35xtf) was conducted, incorporating data from 341 patients with unipolar depression, 82 individuals at risk of depression, and 261 healthy controls across case-control functional magnetic resonance imaging studies examining AM processing. Meta-analytic network-level and behavioral decoding analyses were performed to aid interpretation of the findings. Compared with controls, the depression group displayed increased activation in the right paracingulate cortex (dorsal anterior cingulate [dACC]) and precuneus, and decreased activation in the anterior insula during AM recall. Exploratory valence-specific analyses revealed that negative AM recall was associated with increased activity the dACC and precuneus. Meta-analytic decoding linked the dACC to the salience network and to domains related to negative affect and executive control, while the precuneus was associated with the default mode network and with processes related to social cognition and AM. Findings do not support prevailing models emphasizing altered amygdala and hippocampal function in AM deficits in depression. Instead, they highlight the involvement of core regions within the salience and default mode networks as key neural substrates of AM dysfunction. These regions may contribute to affective, social-cognitive, and mnemonic disturbances that shape the valence-specific nature of AM deficits in depression.
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.