Cited by 438Functional Brain Connectivity StudiesMental Health Research TopicsTreatment of Major Depression

Dynamic Resting-State Functional Connectivity in Major Depression

Open access
Kaiser, Roselinde H, Whitfield-Gabrieli, Susan, Dillon, Daniel G, Goer, Franziska, Beltzer, Miranda, Minkel, Jared, Smoski, Moria, Dichter, Gabriel +1 more·2016·Neuropsychopharmacology

Abstract

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is characterized by abnormal resting-state functional connectivity (RSFC), especially in medial prefrontal cortical (MPFC) regions of the default network. However, prior research in MDD has not examined dynamic changes in functional connectivity as networks form, interact, and dissolve over time. We compared unmedicated individuals with MDD (n=100) to control participants (n=109) on dynamic RSFC (operationalized as SD in RSFC over a series of sliding windows) of an MPFC seed region during a resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging scan. Among participants with MDD, we also investigated the relationship between symptom severity and RSFC. Secondary analyses probed the association between dynamic RSFC and rumination. Results showed that individuals with MDD were characterized by decreased dynamic (less variable) RSFC between MPFC and regions of parahippocampal gyrus within the default network, a pattern related to sustained positive connectivity between these regions across sliding windows. In contrast, the MDD group exhibited increased dynamic (more variable) RSFC between MPFC and regions of insula, and higher severity of depression was related to increased dynamic RSFC between MPFC and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. These patterns of highly variable RSFC were related to greater frequency of strong positive and negative correlations in activity across sliding windows. Secondary analyses indicated that increased dynamic RSFC between MPFC and insula was related to higher levels of recent rumination. These findings provide initial evidence that depression, and ruminative thinking in depression, are related to abnormal patterns of fluctuating communication among brain systems involved in regulating attention and self-referential thinking.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/npp.2015.352

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • RSFC is associated with individual differences such as anxiety and depression.

    “Researchers have found that RSFC is associated with a variety of individual differences, such as, personality [3], depression [47, 48], anxiety [50, 107], autism [18], dementia [6] and Alzheimer’s disease [93].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kaiser, R. H., Whitfield-Gabrieli, S., Dillon, D. G., Goer, F., Beltzer, M., Minkel, J., Smoski, M., Dichter, G., & Pizzagalli, D. A.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • Duke Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
  • Kaiser, Roselinde H
  • Pizzagalli, Diego A
Venue
Neuropsychopharmacology
Published
2015-12-03
Volume
41
Issue
7
Pages
1822-1830
ISSN
  • 0893-133X (ISSN-L)
  • 1740-634X
OpenAlex
W2235823035
Cited by
438
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 49 · 2025: 39 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 41 · 2022: 47 · 2021: 48 · 2020: 68 · 2019: 40 · 2018: 41 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 14
FWCI
15.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuropsychopharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion)
  • UNC Libraries
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (F32MH106262, R00MH094438, R01MH101521, R21MH094781, R01MH095809, R01MH068376, MH101521, MH068376)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (U54HD079124)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
Keywords
major depressive disorder, medial prefrontal cortex, default mode network, parahippocampal gyrus, insula, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, rumination, symptom severity, untreated depression, self-referential processing
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Major Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Neural Pathways, Oxygen, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Rest, Prefrontal Cortex, Nonlinear Dynamics, Young Adult

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