Cited by 214Schizophrenia research and treatmentFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Reduced prefrontal-parietal effective connectivity and working memory deficits in schizophrenia

Open access
Deserno, Lorenz, Sterzer, Philipp, Wüstenberg, Torsten, Heinz, Andreas, Schlagenhauf, Florian·2012·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

The neural mechanisms behind cognitive deficits in schizophrenia still remain unclear. Functional neuroimaging studies on working memory (WM) yielded inconsistent results, suggesting task performance as a moderating variable of prefrontal activation. Beyond regional specific activation, disordered integration of brain regions was supposed as a critical pathophysiological mechanism of cognitive deficits in schizophrenia. Here, we first hypothesized that prefrontal activation implicated in WM depends primarily on task performance and therefore stratified participants into performance subgroups. Second, in line with the dysconnectivity hypothesis, we asked whether connectivity in the prefrontal-parietal network underlying WM is altered in all patients. We used functional magnetic resonance imaging in human subjects (41 schizophrenia patients, 42 healthy controls) and dynamic causal modeling to examine effective connectivity during a WM task. In line with our first hypothesis, we found that prefrontal activation was differentially modulated by task performance: there was a significant task by group by performance interaction revealing an increase of activation with performance in patients and a decrease with performance in controls. Beyond that, we show for the first time that WM-dependent effective connectivity from prefrontal to parietal cortex is reduced in all schizophrenia patients. This finding was independent of performance. In conclusion, our results are in line with the highly influential hypothesis that the relationship between WM performance and prefrontal activation follows an inverted U-shaped function. Moreover, this study in a large sample of patients reveals a mechanism underlying prefrontal inefficiency and cognitive deficits in schizophrenia, thereby providing direct experimental evidence for the dysconnectivity hypothesis.

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 · 10.1523/jneurosci.3405-11.2012

Cites

63 of 63 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?

  • DCM studies in schizophrenia demonstrated differences in functional network architecture and effective connectivity compared to healthy controls across various tasks.

    “These studies demonstrated differences in functional network architecture and effective connectivity compared to healthy controls across various tasks.”
  • The empirical neuroimaging literature has identified several distinct sets of brain areas underlying working-memory performance.

    “The empirical neuroimaging literature has bolstered these conceptualizations by identifying several distinct sets of brain areas underlying working-memory performance (13–17).”

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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. First MB, Spitzer RL, Gibbon M, Williams J (1997) Structured Clinical In- terview for DSM-IV Personality Disorders (SCID-II). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Deserno, L., Sterzer, P., Wüstenberg, T., Heinz, A., & Schlagenhauf, F.
Affiliations
  • Max Planck Society (DE)
  • Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin (DE)
  • Stiftung Charité (DE)
  • NeuroCure Cluster of Excellence (DE)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2012-01-04
Volume
32
Issue
1
Pages
12-20
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2131036748
Cited by
214
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 27 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 11
FWCI
18.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG EXC-257, EXC257, 01QG87164)
  • Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (01QG87164, 01GS08159)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
schizophrenia, working memory, effective connectivity, prefrontal cortex activation, task performance, dynamic causal modeling, cognitive impairment
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Memory Disorders, Memory, Short-Term, Middle Aged, Models, Neurological, Neural Pathways, Parietal Lobe, Schizophrenia, Schizophrenic Psychology, Case-Control Studies, Prefrontal Cortex, 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