Cited by 15Functional Brain Connectivity StudiesTreatment of Major DepressionNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Functional connectivity evidence for state-independent executive function deficits in patients with major depressive disorder

Liu, Jin, Ju, Yumeng, Fan, Yiming, Liu, Bangshan, Zeng, Ling-Li, Wang, Mi, Dong, Qiangli, Lu, Xiaowen +12 more·2021·Journal of Affective Disorders

Abstract

Background Persistent neurocognitive deficits are often associated with poor outcomes of major depressive disorder (MDD). Executive dysfunction is the most common cognitive deficit in MDD. However, it remains unclear which subcomponent of executive dysfunction is state-independent with distinct neural substrates. Methods A comprehensive neurocognitive test battery was used to assess four subcomponents of executive function (working memory, inhibition, shifting, and verbal fluency) in 95 MDD patients and 111 matched healthy controls (HCs). After 6 months of paroxetine treatment, 56 patients achieved clinical remission (rMDD) and completed the second-time neurocognitive test. Network-based statistics analysis was utilized to explore the changes in functional connectivity (FC). Results Compared with the HCs, all the four subcomponents of MDD patients were significantly impaired. After treatment, there was a significant improvement in working memory, inhibition, and verbal fluency in the rMDD group. And shifting and verbal fluency of the rMDD group remained impaired compared with the HCs. Fifteen functional connections were interrupted in the MDD group, and 11 connections remained in a disrupted state after treatment. Importantly, verbal fluency was negatively correlated with the disrupted FC between the right dorsal prefrontal cortex and the left inferior parietal lobule in patients with MDD and remitted MDD. Limitations The correlation analysis of the association between cognit…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jad.2021.04.080

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Liu, J., Ju, Y., Fan, Y., Liu, B., Zeng, L.-L., Wang, M., Dong, Q., Lu, X., Sun, J., Zhang, L., Guo, H., Zhao, F., Li, W., Zhang, L., Li, Z., Liao, M., Zhang, X., Zhang, Y., Hu, D., & Li, L.
Affiliations
  • Central South University (CN)
  • National University of Defense Technology (CN)
  • Zhumadian Central Hospital (CN)
  • Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN)
Corresponding author
  • Hu, Dewen
  • Li, Lingjiang
Venue
Journal of Affective Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-08
Volume
291
Pages
76-82
ISSN
0165-0327 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3164902379
Cited by
15
References
10
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2
FWCI
1.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Affective Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China
  • Fok Ying Tung Foundation
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
major depressive disorder, executive function, functional connectivity, verbal fluency, working memory, inhibition, cognitive flexibility, remission, dorsal prefrontal cortex, inferior parietal lobule, network-based statistics
MeSH terms
Cognition Disorders, Major Depressive Disorder, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Executive Function, Cognitive Dysfunction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review