The DOI matches its Crossref record; 91 of the 91 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Systematic review and meta-analysis of the relationship between the heartbeat-evoked potential and interoception
Open accessAbstract
The Heartbeat Evoked Potential (HEP) has been proposed as a neurophysiological marker of interoceptive processing. Despite its use to validate interoceptive measures and to assess interoceptive functioning in clinical groups, the empirical evidence for a relationship between HEP amplitude and interoceptive processing, including measures of such processing, is scattered across several studies with varied designs. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the body of HEP-interoception research, and consider the associations the HEP shows with various direct and indirect measures of interoception, and how it is affected by manipulations of interoceptive processing. Specifically, we assessed the effect on HEP amplitude of manipulating attention to the heartbeat; manipulating participants' arousal; the association between the HEP and behavioural measures of cardiac interoception; and comparisons between healthy and clinical groups. Following database searches and screening, 45 studies were included in the systematic review and 42 in the meta-analyses. We noted variations in the ways individual studies have attempted to address key confounds, particularly the cardiac field artefact. Meta-analytic summaries indicated there were moderate to large effects of attention, arousal, and clinical status on the HEP, and a moderate association between HEP amplitude and behavioural measures of interoception. Problematically, the reliability of the meta-analytic effects documented here remain unknown, given the lack of standardised protocols for measuring the HEP. Thus, it is possible effects are driven by confounds such as cardiac factors or somatosensory effects.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
The cited source doesn’t support the claim as written.
In the citing paper
“So far, cardiac parameters themselves such as heart rate or stroke volume seem to have only a limited influence on HERs' variability 79-81 .”
From Interoceptive rhythms in the brain (2023) · cites this paper as [81]
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“Most research to date, however, has been based on neuroanatomical correlates with fMRI or studying the heart-evoked potential (HEP).6, 7, 8”
From Altered spatiotemporal brain dynamics of interoception in behavioural-variant frontotemporal dementia (2025) · cites this paper as [6]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & for the PRISMA Group (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2535 · Cited by 83,823
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The PRISMA Group (2009) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 · Cited by 64,042
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement.
(2009) · PubMed Central · Cited by 44,859
Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package
Viechtbauer, W. (2010) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v036.i03 · Cited by 20,464
The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results.
Rosenthal, R. (1979) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638 · Cited by 9,068 · cited 1×
“First, we did not consider369 publication bias (Rosenthal, 1979) and within-study biases created by the fact that most370 studies reviewed only reported significant effects from several tests.”
BackgroundDistribution Theory for Glass's Estimator of Effect Size and Related Estimators
Hedges, L. V. (1981) · Journal of Educational Statistics · doi:10.2307/1164588 · Cited by 5,695
MEG and EEG data analysis with MNE-Python
Gramfort, A. (2013) · Frontiers in Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnins.2013.00267 · Cited by 3,882
The Handbook of Research Synthesis.
Howel, D., Cooper, H., & Hedges, L. V. (1995) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2533295 · Cited by 3,657
Spherical splines for scalp potential and current density mapping
Perrin, F., Pernier, J., Bertrand, O., & Echallier, J. F. (1989) · Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/0013-4694(89)90180-6 · Cited by 2,706
Interoception: the sense of the physiological condition of the body
(Bud) Craig, A. (2003) · Current Opinion in Neurobiology · doi:10.1016/s0959-4388(03)00090-4 · Cited by 2,556
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Interoceptive rhythms in the brain
Engelen, T., Solcà, M., & Tallon-Baudry, C. (2023) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/s41593-023-01425-1 · Cited by 207
Atypical interoception as a common risk factor for psychopathology: A review
Brewer, R., Murphy, J., & Bird, G. (2021) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.07.036 · Cited by 180
Self-citationBlood pressure pulsations modulate central neuronal activity via mechanosensitive ion channels
Jammal, L., Bitzenhofer, S. H., Hanganu‐Opatz, I. L., Dutschmann, M., & Egger, V. (2024) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.adk8511 · Cited by 135
Brain-heart interactions in the neurobiology of consciousness
Candia‐Rivera, D. (2022) · Current Research in Neurobiology · doi:10.1016/j.crneur.2022.100050 · Cited by 114
Crucianelli, L., Enmalm, A., & Ehrsson, H. H. (2022) · Biological Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.biopsycho.2022.108355 · Cited by 81
Metadata
- Authors
- Coll, M.-P., Hobson, H., Bird, G., & Murphy, J.
- Affiliations
- McGill University (CA)
- University of York (GB)
- University of Oxford (GB)
- Royal Holloway University of London (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Coll, Michel-Pierre
- Venue
- Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2021-03
- Volume
- 122
- Pages
- 190-200
- ISSN
- 0149-7634 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3112896572
- Cited by
- 262
- References
- 89
- Citations by year
- 2026: 45 · 2025: 66 · 2024: 60 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 20
- FWCI
- 6.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- orcid.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
- University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Canadian Institutes of Health Research
- Economic and Social Research Council (ES/R007527/1)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
- Keywords
- heartbeat-evoked potentials, interoception, cardiac interoception, arousal, clinical groups
- MeSH terms
- Arousal, Awareness, Evoked Potentials, Heart Rate, Humans, Reproducibility of Results, Interoception
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
