Cited by 20Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Network changes in insula and amygdala connectivity accompany implicit suicidal associations

Open access
Ballard, Elizabeth D., Gilbert, Jessica R., Fields, Jessica S., Nugent, Allison C., Zarate, Carlos A.·2020·Frontiers in Psychiatry

Abstract

Limited knowledge exists regarding the neurobiology of suicidal thoughts, given that there are currently no direct probes of the suicidal state. This pilot study used magnetoencephalography (MEG) to evaluate correlates of the implicit association between the self and death compared to the self and life as objective markers of suicide risk. Healthy volunteers (HVs; n=21) completed a modified version of the Suicide Implicit Association Task (S-IAT) during MEG scanning. Gamma power-which is considered a proxy measure of excitation-inhibition balance-was directly compared in the self-death/self-life contrast. As a proof-of-concept, the ability of dynamic causal modeling to categorize HVs versus four individuals with recent suicide crisis (SC) was evaluated. In HVs, enhanced gamma power in both amygdala and anterior insula were found for the self-death compared with self-life contrast. In addition, connectivity estimates between early visual cortex, anterior insula, and amygdala correctly categorized SC participants with 77% to 82% sensitivity and 80% to 85% specificity. These findings, which implicate network-level changes in salience network and amygdala connectivity in mediating suicidal associations, require further replication in larger samples. Direct probing of suicidal thoughts with the S-IAT may provide foundational markers of neural circuits associated with suicide risk.

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/fpsyt.2020.577628

Cites

27 of 27 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?

  • Gamma connectivity estimates among these regions differentiated healthy volunteers from a small group of individuals (N=4) experiencing a suicide crisis.

    “Gamma connectivity estimates among these regions also differentiated healthy volunteers from a small group of individuals (N=4) experiencing a suicide crisis, defined as attempt or ideation with intent over the prior two weeks.”
  • Enhanced gamma oscillations were observed in the amygdala and anterior insula for self-death compared with self-life associations.

    “Relatedly, enhanced gamma oscillations were observed in the amygdala and anterior insula for self-death compared with self-life associations (Ballard, Gilbert et al., 2020).”
  • Connectivity estimates between early visual cortex, amygdala, and anterior insula during the suicide-related implicit association test correctly categorized recent suicide attempters with 77 to 82% sensitivity and 80 to 85% specificity.

    “A second study measuring connectivity changes between early visual cortex, amygdala, and anterior insula during the suicide-related IAT in a group of healthy participants and small group of recent suicide attempters found that connectivity estimates between these regions correctly categorized recent attempters with 77 to 82% sensitivity and 80 to 85% specificity (85).”

    From New methods for assessing rapid changes in suicide risk (2021) · cites this paper as [85]

  • The previous study measuring connectivity during the suicide-related implicit association test included only four participants with a recent suicide attempt.

    “as the previous study included only four participants with a recent suicide attempt.”

    From New methods for assessing rapid changes in suicide risk (2021) · cites this paper as [85]

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

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [20]First MB Spitzer RL Gibbon M Williams JB Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV TR Axis I Disorders, Research Version, Patient Edition. New York State Psychiatric Institute, Biometrics Research: New York (2001).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ballard, E. D., Gilbert, J. R., Fields, J. S., Nugent, A. C., & Zarate, C. A.
Affiliations
National Institutes of Health (US)
Corresponding author
Ballard, Elizabeth D.
Venue
Frontiers in Psychiatry
Published
2020-09-24
Volume
11
Pages
577628-577628
ISSN
1664-0640 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3088937338
Cited by
20
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3
FWCI
1.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
suicide risk, implicit associations, anterior insula, amygdala, salience network, gamma power, excitation-inhibition balance, early visual cortex, dynamic causal modeling, suicidal crisis

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