Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41943417›Full record

SynthesisPsychophysiology2026

Heartbeat-Evoked Responses in M/EEG: A Systematic Review of Methods With Suggestions for Analysis and Reporting.

Paul Steinfath, Maria Azanova, Nikolai Kapralov, Thomas Loesche, Lioba Enk, Vadim Nikulin, Arno Villringer

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Psychophysiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The Mind From Within: Visceral Roots of Human Cognition.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
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.

Paul SteinfathDepartment of Neurology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Leipzig, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7388-9870
Maria AzanovaDepartment of Neurology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Leipzig, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6563-7879
Nikolai KapralovDepartment of Neurology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Leipzig, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5659-7307
Thomas LoescheDepartment of Neurology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Leipzig, Germany.
Lioba EnkDepartment of Neurology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Leipzig, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-9671-5339
Vadim NikulinDepartment of Neurology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Leipzig, Germany.
Arno VillringerDepartment of Neurology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Leipzig, Germany.

Funding

Max-Planck-Institut für Kognitions- und Neurowissenschaften
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Heartbeat-evoked responses (HER), as measured by electroencephalography (EEG) or magnetoencephalography (MEG), represent neural activity time-locked to heartbeats and are widely used as a marker of cardiac interoception in the study of brain-body interactions. However, HER studies report largely variable findings, at least partially due to methodological variability. To achieve consensus on HER processing and improve the reproducibility of findings, the field urgently requires a structured summary of the methods employed so far. To this end, we conducted a systematic review of 132 HER studies using non-invasive M/EEG recordings in humans. Our results reveal substantial heterogeneity across most steps of HER analysis, ranging from data acquisition and preprocessing to HER estimation and statistical approaches. The large diversity in the processing choices is accompanied by considerable proportions of unreported methodological information across reviewed studies, reaching up to 80% for key processing steps. In addition, less than 33% of studies had enough statistical power to reliably detect meta-level HER effects, while their reported spatiotemporal locations varied substantially. We provide a comprehensive reporting and quality control checklist to aid in the development of more standardized procedures, highlighting critical steps for robust HER investigations. Additionally, we share the full extracted dataset, including an interactive version, to support other researchers in answering additional specific questions they may have. We hope that these resources will improve the robustness, reproducibility, and transparency of research in the growing HER field.

Indexed as

BrainElectroencephalographyEvoked PotentialsHeart RateInteroceptionMagnetoencephalographyHumansECGEEGheartbeat‐evoked potentialheartbeat‐evoked responseMEGmethodological variabilityreporting guidelines

Identifiers

PMID41943417
PMCPMC13053922

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.