Cited by 22Psychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control

The impact of unpredictability on dyspnea perception, anxiety and interoceptive error processing

Open access
Tan, Yafei, Van den Bergh, Omer, Qiu, Jiang, von Leupoldt, Andreas·2019·Frontiers in Physiology

Abstract

Dyspnea is a prevalent interoceptive sensation and the aversive cardinal symptom in many cardiorespiratory diseases as well as in mental disorders. Especially the unpredictability of the occurrence of dyspnea episodes has been suggested to be highly anxiety provoking for affected patients. Moreover, previous studies demonstrated that unpredictable exteroceptive stimuli increased self-reports and electrophysiological responses of anxiety such as the startle probe N100 as well as amplified the processing of errors as reflected by greater error-related negativity (ERN). However, studies directly examining the role of unpredictability on dyspnea perception, anxiety and error processing are widely absent. Using high-density electroencephalography, the present study investigated whether unpredictable compared to predictable dyspnea would increase the perception of dyspnea, anxiety and interoceptive error processing. Thirty-two healthy participants performed a respiratory forced choice reaction time task to elicit an interoceptive ERN during two conditions: an unpredictable and a predictable resistive load-induced dyspnea condition. Predictability was manipulated by pairing (predictable condition) or not pairing (unpredictable condition) dyspnea with a startle tone probe. Self-reports of dyspnea and affective state as well as the startle probe N100 and interoceptive ERN were measured. The results demonstrated greater dyspnea unpleasantness in the unpredictable compared to the predictable condition. Post-hoc analyses revealed that this was paralleled by greater anxiety, and greater amplitudes for the startle probe N100 and the interoceptive ERN during the unpredictable relative to the predictable condition, but only when the unpredictable condition was experienced in the first experimental block. Furthermore, higher trait-like anxiety sensitivity was associated with higher ratings for dyspnea unpleasantness and experimental state anxiety ratings. The present findings suggest that unpredictability increases the perception of dyspnea unpleasantness. This effect seems related to increased state and trait anxiety and interoceptive error processing, especially when upcoming dyspnea is particularly unpredictable, such as in early experimental phases. Future studies are required to further substantiate these findings in patients suffering from dyspnea.

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 · 10.3389/fphys.2019.00535

Cites

88 of 88 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?

  • Although NIV can produce significant clinical improvement in COPD people, they often reject it or use it incorrectly, resulting in worse clinical outcomes and healthcare costs.

    “Although NIV can produce a significant clinical improvement in COPD people, they often reject it or use it incorrectly, resulting in worse clinical outcomes and healthcare costs.”

    From Promoting Acceptance and Adherence to Noninvasive Ventilation in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Randomized Controlled Trial. (2022) · cites this paper as [23]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) discusses the burden of dyspnea in COPD, but not noninvasive ventilation. Searches for NIV, treatment rejection or incorrect use, and associated clinical outcomes or healthcare costs found no passage addressing the claim. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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
Tan, Y., Van den Bergh, O., Qiu, J., & von Leupoldt, A.
Affiliations
Southwest University (CN)
Corresponding author
Qiu, Jiang
Venue
Frontiers in Physiology
Published
2019-05-03
Volume
10
Pages
535-535
ISSN
1664-042X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2943703086
Cited by
22
References
88
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1
FWCI
1.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Physiology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • KU Leuven (METH/15/011, STRT/13/002, AKUL/13/07)
  • China Scholarship Council (201606990047)
  • Vlaamse regering (METH/15/011, AKUL/13/07)
  • Herculesstichting (AKUL/13/07)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Keywords
dyspnea, unpredictability, anxiety, error-related negativity, anxiety sensitivity, cardiopulmonary disease, 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