The characteristics of event-related potentials in generalized anxiety disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Journal of psychiatric research Pub Date : 2024-12-06 DOI:10.1016/j.jpsychires.2024.12.016
Cheng Xie, Chen Xue, Yuxi Li, Xiaobo Liu, Donglin Zhong, Qizu Jin, Juan Li, Rongjiang Jin
{"title":"The characteristics of event-related potentials in generalized anxiety disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Cheng Xie, Chen Xue, Yuxi Li, Xiaobo Liu, Donglin Zhong, Qizu Jin, Juan Li, Rongjiang Jin","doi":"10.1016/j.jpsychires.2024.12.016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Previous studies have reported inconsistent findings regarding event-related potentials (ERPs) abnormalities in individuals with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). This meta-analysis aimed to systematically review and synthesize the existing evidence on ERP alterations in individuals with GAD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Excerpta Medica Database, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database (VIP), Wanfang database, and China Biology Medicine (CBM) databases from inception to November 11, 2024. Gray literature and reference lists were also manually searched. Studies investigating ERP component differences between individuals with GAD and healthy controls were included. Two independent reviewers conducted study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment. Influence and sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the pooled results. Effect sizes (SMD, Hedge's g) were calculated for latency and amplitude differences. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I<sup>2</sup> statistic. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses were conducted to explore the source of heterogeneity. Trim-and-fill analyses were applied to assess potential publication bias. Data synthesis was performed using R (version 4.2.3) software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 37 studies involving 1086 individuals with GAD and 1315 healthy controls were included. The overall risk of bias was rated as low for 25 studies and moderate for 12 studies. Ten ERP components were included in the quantitative meta-analysis: P3, N2, N1, P2, Error Related Negativity (ERN), Correction Related Negativity (CRN), Mismatch Negativity (MMN), P1 (amplitude), Pe, and LPP. Pooled results indicated that individuals with GAD exhibited decreased P3 amplitude (g = -0.54, 95% CI: -0.70 to -0.38, I<sup>2</sup> = 20%, P = 0.22) and increased ERN amplitude (g = -0.42, 95% CI: -0.72 to -0.12, I<sup>2</sup> = 40%, P = 0.11) compared to healthy controls. In addition, delayed latency of P3 (g = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.09 to 0.78, I<sup>2</sup> = 75%, P < 0.01), N2 (g = 0.36, 95% CI: 0.11 to 0.62, I<sup>2</sup> = 30%, P = 0.20), and MMN (g = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.52 to 0.75, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%, P < 0.0001) was observed in individuals with GAD. Due to the limited number of included studies, the results of N170, N1/P2, N270, N400, VPP, BAEP, P1 (latency), P50, EPN and Nf were summarized narratively. Individuals with GAD were reported to have increased N170, N400, and VPP amplitude and delayed P1 latency compared to healthy controls. Age, sex ratio, sample size, diagnostic criteria, task-related modality, and paradigm were identified as potential influencing factors of ERP characteristics.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Individuals with GAD exhibit increased ERN amplitude and decreased P3 amplitude in contrast with healthy controls. In addition, delayed latency of P3, N2, and MMN is detected in individuals with GAD. The identified ERP components in individuals with GAD are associated with attention, cognition, visual perception, error or conflict monitoring, semantic information integration, and auditory sensory memory processes. Due to the limited number of included studies and high heterogeneity, further studies with high quality are needed to confirm these findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":16868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of psychiatric research","volume":"181 ","pages":"470-483"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of psychiatric research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2024.12.016","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Previous studies have reported inconsistent findings regarding event-related potentials (ERPs) abnormalities in individuals with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). This meta-analysis aimed to systematically review and synthesize the existing evidence on ERP alterations in individuals with GAD.

Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Excerpta Medica Database, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database (VIP), Wanfang database, and China Biology Medicine (CBM) databases from inception to November 11, 2024. Gray literature and reference lists were also manually searched. Studies investigating ERP component differences between individuals with GAD and healthy controls were included. Two independent reviewers conducted study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment. Influence and sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the pooled results. Effect sizes (SMD, Hedge's g) were calculated for latency and amplitude differences. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses were conducted to explore the source of heterogeneity. Trim-and-fill analyses were applied to assess potential publication bias. Data synthesis was performed using R (version 4.2.3) software.

Results: A total of 37 studies involving 1086 individuals with GAD and 1315 healthy controls were included. The overall risk of bias was rated as low for 25 studies and moderate for 12 studies. Ten ERP components were included in the quantitative meta-analysis: P3, N2, N1, P2, Error Related Negativity (ERN), Correction Related Negativity (CRN), Mismatch Negativity (MMN), P1 (amplitude), Pe, and LPP. Pooled results indicated that individuals with GAD exhibited decreased P3 amplitude (g = -0.54, 95% CI: -0.70 to -0.38, I2 = 20%, P = 0.22) and increased ERN amplitude (g = -0.42, 95% CI: -0.72 to -0.12, I2 = 40%, P = 0.11) compared to healthy controls. In addition, delayed latency of P3 (g = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.09 to 0.78, I2 = 75%, P < 0.01), N2 (g = 0.36, 95% CI: 0.11 to 0.62, I2 = 30%, P = 0.20), and MMN (g = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.52 to 0.75, I2 = 0%, P < 0.0001) was observed in individuals with GAD. Due to the limited number of included studies, the results of N170, N1/P2, N270, N400, VPP, BAEP, P1 (latency), P50, EPN and Nf were summarized narratively. Individuals with GAD were reported to have increased N170, N400, and VPP amplitude and delayed P1 latency compared to healthy controls. Age, sex ratio, sample size, diagnostic criteria, task-related modality, and paradigm were identified as potential influencing factors of ERP characteristics.

Conclusions: Individuals with GAD exhibit increased ERN amplitude and decreased P3 amplitude in contrast with healthy controls. In addition, delayed latency of P3, N2, and MMN is detected in individuals with GAD. The identified ERP components in individuals with GAD are associated with attention, cognition, visual perception, error or conflict monitoring, semantic information integration, and auditory sensory memory processes. Due to the limited number of included studies and high heterogeneity, further studies with high quality are needed to confirm these findings.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of psychiatric research
Journal of psychiatric research 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
2.10%
发文量
622
审稿时长
130 days
期刊介绍: Founded in 1961 to report on the latest work in psychiatry and cognate disciplines, the Journal of Psychiatric Research is dedicated to innovative and timely studies of four important areas of research: (1) clinical studies of all disciplines relating to psychiatric illness, as well as normal human behaviour, including biochemical, physiological, genetic, environmental, social, psychological and epidemiological factors; (2) basic studies pertaining to psychiatry in such fields as neuropsychopharmacology, neuroendocrinology, electrophysiology, genetics, experimental psychology and epidemiology; (3) the growing application of clinical laboratory techniques in psychiatry, including imagery and spectroscopy of the brain, molecular biology and computer sciences;
期刊最新文献
ADHD and alcohol: Emotional regulation efforts pay off in quality of life points. The therapeutic effects of theta burst stimulation on negative symptoms in chronic schizophrenia using functional near-infrared spectroscopy. Behavioral and psychosocial factors associated with suicidal ideation in adolescents with depression: An ecological model of health behavior. Suicide risk among residents and PhD students: A systematic review of the literature. The characteristics of event-related potentials in generalized anxiety disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1