Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (29)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (29)
Year of publication
Document Type
- Journal article (29)
Language
- English (29) (remove)
Keywords
- anxiety (4)
- depression (3)
- fear conditioning (3)
- Alzheimer’s disease (2)
- biodiversity (2)
- fear generalization (2)
- fear-potentiated startle (2)
- psychiatry (2)
- 5HTTLPR (1)
- ADHD (1)
Institute
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Psychiatrie, Psychosomatik und Psychotherapie (26)
- Institut für Psychologie (11)
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Kinder- und Jugendpsychiatrie, Psychosomatik und Psychotherapie (7)
- Institut für Klinische Neurobiologie (2)
- Theodor-Boveri-Institut für Biowissenschaften (2)
- Institut für Geographie und Geologie (1)
- Institut für Hygiene und Mikrobiologie (1)
- Institut für Informatik (1)
- Institut für Klinische Epidemiologie und Biometrie (1)
- Institut für Pharmakologie und Toxikologie (1)
EU-Project number / Contract (GA) number
- 696802 (1)
Physical and mental well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic is typically assessed via surveys, which might make it difficult to conduct longitudinal studies and might lead to data suffering from recall bias. Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) driven smartphone apps can help alleviate such issues, allowing for in situ recordings. Implementing such an app is not trivial, necessitates strict regulatory and legal requirements, and requires short development cycles to appropriately react to abrupt changes in the pandemic. Based on an existing app framework, we developed Corona Health, an app that serves as a platform for deploying questionnaire-based studies in combination with recordings of mobile sensors. In this paper, we present the technical details of Corona Health and provide first insights into the collected data. Through collaborative efforts from experts from public health, medicine, psychology, and computer science, we released Corona Health publicly on Google Play and the Apple App Store (in July 2020) in eight languages and attracted 7290 installations so far. Currently, five studies related to physical and mental well-being are deployed and 17,241 questionnaires have been filled out. Corona Health proves to be a viable tool for conducting research related to the COVID-19 pandemic and can serve as a blueprint for future EMA-based studies. The data we collected will substantially improve our knowledge on mental and physical health states, traits and trajectories as well as its risk and protective factors over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic and its diverse prevention measures.
Recent studies as well as theoretical models of error processing assign fundamental importance to the brain's dopaminergic system. Research about how the electrophysiological correlates of error processing—the error-related negativity (ERN) and the error positivity (Pe)—are influenced by variations of common dopaminergic genes, however, is still relatively scarce. In the present study, we therefore investigated whether polymorphisms in the DAT1 gene and in the DRD4 gene, respectively, lead to interindividual differences in these error processing correlates. One hundred sixty participants completed a version of the Eriksen Flanker Task while a 26-channel EEG was recorded. The task was slightly modified in order to increase error rates. During data analysis, participants were split into two groups depending on their DAT1 and their DRD4 genotypes, respectively. ERN and Pe amplitudes after correct responses and after errors as well as difference amplitudes between errors and correct responses were analyzed. We found a differential effect of DAT1 genotype on the Pe difference amplitude but not on the ERN difference amplitude, while the reverse was true for DRD4 genotype. These findings are in line with predictions from theoretical models of dopaminergic transmission in the brain. They furthermore tie results from clinical investigations of disorders impacting on the dopamine system to genetic variations known to be at-risk genotypes.
Background:
Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder has been shown to affect working memory, and fMRI studies in children and adolescents with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder report hypoactivation in task-related attentional networks. However, studies with adult attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder patients addressing this issue as well as the effects of clinically valid methylphenidate treatment are scarce. This study contributes to closing this gap.
Methods:
Thirty-five adult patients were randomized to 6 weeks of double-blind placebo or methylphenidate treatment. Patients completed an fMRI n-back working memory task both before and after the assigned treatment, and matched healthy controls were tested and compared to the untreated patients.
Results:
There were no whole-brain differences between any of the groups. However, when specified regions of interest were investigated, the patient group showed enhanced BOLD responses in dorsal and ventral areas before treatment. This increase was correlated with performance across all participants and with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms in the patient group. Furthermore, we found an effect of treatment in the right superior frontal gyrus, with methylphenidate-treated patients exhibiting increased activation, which was absent in the placebo-treated patients.
Conclusions:
Our results indicate distinct activation differences between untreated adult attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder patients and matched healthy controls during a working memory task. These differences might reflect compensatory efforts by the patients, who are performing at the same level as the healthy controls. We furthermore found a positive effect of methylphenidate on the activation of a frontal region of interest. These observations contribute to a more thorough understanding of adult attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder and provide impulses for the evaluation of therapy-related changes.
A variety of factors contribute to the degree to which a person feels lonely and socially isolated. These factors may be particularly relevant in contexts requiring social distancing, e.g., during the COVID-19 pandemic or in states of immunodeficiency. We present the Loneliness and Isolation during Social Distancing (LISD) Scale. Extending existing measures, the LISD scale measures both state and trait aspects of loneliness and isolation, including indicators of social connectedness and support. In addition, it reliably predicts individual differences in anxiety and depression. Data were collected online from two independent samples in a social distancing context (the COVID-19 pandemic). Factorial validation was based on exploratory factor analysis (EFA; Sample 1, N = 244) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA; Sample 2, N = 304). Multiple regression analyses were used to assess how the LISD scale predicts state anxiety and depression. The LISD scale showed satisfactory fit in both samples. Its two state factors indicate being lonely and isolated as well as connected and supported, while its three trait factors reflect general loneliness and isolation, sociability and sense of belonging, and social closeness and support. Our results imply strong predictive power of the LISD scale for state anxiety and depression, explaining 33 and 51% of variance, respectively. Anxiety and depression scores were particularly predicted by low dispositional sociability and sense of belonging and by currently being more lonely and isolated. In turn, being lonely and isolated was related to being less connected and supported (state) as well as having lower social closeness and support in general (trait). We provide a novel scale which distinguishes between acute and general dimensions of loneliness and social isolation while also predicting mental health. The LISD scale could be a valuable and economic addition to the assessment of mental health factors impacted by social distancing.
The extinction of conditioned fear depends on an efficient interplay between the amygdala and the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC). In rats, high-frequency electrical mPFC stimulation has been shown to improve extinction by means of a reduction of amygdala activity. However, so far it is unclear whether stimulation of homologues regions in humans might have similar beneficial effects. Healthy volunteers received one session of either active or sham repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) covering the mPFC while undergoing a 2-day fear conditioning and extinction paradigm. Repetitive TMS was applied offline after fear acquisition in which one of two faces (CS+ but not CS−) was associated with an aversive scream (UCS). Immediate extinction learning (day 1) and extinction recall (day 2) were conducted without UCS delivery. Conditioned responses (CR) were assessed in a multimodal approach using fear-potentiated startle (FPS), skin conductance responses (SCR), functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS), and self-report scales. Consistent with the hypothesis of a modulated processing of conditioned fear after high-frequency rTMS, the active group showed a reduced CS+/CS− discrimination during extinction learning as evident in FPS as well as in SCR and arousal ratings. FPS responses to CS+ further showed a linear decrement throughout both extinction sessions. This study describes the first experimental approach of influencing conditioned fear by using rTMS and can thus be a basis for future studies investigating a complementation of mPFC stimulation to cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT).
Objective
Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a growing challenge worldwide, which is why the search for early-onset predictors must be focused as soon as possible. Longitudinal studies that investigate courses of neuropsychological and other variables screen for such predictors correlated to mild cognitive impairment (MCI). However, one often neglected issue in analyses of such studies is measurement invariance (MI), which is often assumed but not tested for. This study uses the absence of MI (non-MI) and latent factor scores instead of composite variables to assess properties of cognitive domains, compensation mechanisms, and their predictability to establish a method for a more comprehensive understanding of pathological cognitive decline.
Methods
An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and a set of increasingly restricted confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) were conducted to find latent factors, compared them with the composite approach, and to test for longitudinal (partial-)MI in a neuropsychiatric test battery, consisting of 14 test variables. A total of 330 elderly (mean age: 73.78 ± 1.52 years at baseline) were analyzed two times (3 years apart).
Results
EFA revealed a four-factor model representing declarative memory, attention, working memory, and visual–spatial processing. Based on CFA, an accurate model was estimated across both measurement timepoints. Partial non-MI was found for parameters such as loadings, test- and latent factor intercepts as well as latent factor variances. The latent factor approach was preferable to the composite approach.
Conclusion
The overall assessment of non-MI latent factors may pose a possible target for this field of research. Hence, the non-MI of variances indicated variables that are especially suited for the prediction of pathological cognitive decline, while non-MI of intercepts indicated general aging-related decline. As a result, the sole assessment of MI may help distinguish pathological from normative aging processes and additionally may reveal compensatory neuropsychological mechanisms.
Dementia, including Alzheimer's disease, is a growing problem worldwide. Prevention or early detection of the disease or a prodromal cognitive decline is necessary. By means of our long-term follow-up ‘Vogel study’, we aim to predict the pathological cognitive decline of a German cohort (mean age was 73.9 ± 1.55 years at first visit) with three measurement time points within 6 years per participant. Especially in samples of the elderly and subjects with chronic or co-morbid diseases, dropouts are one of the biggest problems of long-term studies. In contrast to the large number of research articles conducted on the course of dementia, little research has been done on the completion of treatment. To ensure unbiased and reliable predictors of cognitive decline from study completers, our objective was to determine predictors of dropout. We conducted multivariate analyses of covariance and multinomial logistic regression analyses to compare and predict the subject's dropout behaviour at the second visit 3 years after baseline (full participation, partial participation and no participation/dropout) with neuropsychiatric, cognitive, blood and lifestyle variables. Lower performance in declarative memory, attention and visual–spatial processing predicted dropout rather than full participation. Lower performance in visual–spatial processing predicted partial participation as opposed to full participation. Furthermore, lower performance in mini-mental status examination predicted whether subjects dropped out or participated partially instead of full participation. Baseline cognitive parameters are associated with dropouts at follow-up with a loss of impaired participants. We expect a bias into a healthier sample over time.
Background
In individuals suffering from a rare disease the diagnostic process and the confirmation of a final diagnosis often extends over many years. Factors contributing to delayed diagnosis include health care professionals' limited knowledge of rare diseases and frequent (co-)occurrence of mental disorders that may complicate and delay the diagnostic process. The ZSE-DUO study aims to assess the benefits of a combination of a physician focusing on somatic aspects with a mental health expert working side by side as a tandem in the diagnostic process.
Study design
This multi-center, prospective controlled study has a two-phase cohort design.
Methods
Two cohorts of 682 patients each are sequentially recruited from 11 university-based German Centers for Rare Diseases (CRD): the standard care cohort (control, somatic expertise only) and the innovative care cohort (experimental, combined somatic and mental health expertise). Individuals aged 12 years and older presenting with symptoms and signs which are not explained by current diagnoses will be included. Data will be collected prior to the first visit to the CRD’s outpatient clinic (T0), at the first visit (T1) and 12 months thereafter (T2).
Outcomes
Primary outcome is the percentage of patients with one or more confirmed diagnoses covering the symptomatic spectrum presented. Sample size is calculated to detect a 10 percent increase from 30% in standard care to 40% in the innovative dual expert cohort. Secondary outcomes are (a) time to diagnosis/diagnoses explaining the symptomatology; (b) proportion of patients successfully referred from CRD to standard care; (c) costs of diagnosis including incremental cost effectiveness ratios; (d) predictive value of screening instruments administered at T0 to identify patients with mental disorders; (e) patients’ quality of life and evaluation of care; and f) physicians’ satisfaction with the innovative care approach.
Conclusions
This is the first multi-center study to investigate the effects of a mental health specialist working in tandem with a somatic expert physician in CRDs. If this innovative approach proves successful, it will be made available on a larger scale nationally and promoted internationally. In the best case, ZSE-DUO can significantly shorten the time to diagnosis for a suspected rare disease.
Anxiety patients over-generalize fear, possibly because of an incapacity to discriminate threat and safety signals. Discrimination trainings are promising approaches for reducing such fear over-generalization. Here we investigated the efficacy of a fear-relevant vs. a fear-irrelevant discrimination training on fear generalization and whether the effects are increased with feedback during training. Eighty participants underwent two fear acquisition blocks, during which one face (conditioned stimulus, CS+), but not another face (CS−), was associated with a female scream (unconditioned stimulus, US). During two generalization blocks, both CSs plus four morphs (generalization stimuli, GS1–GS4) were presented. Between these generalization blocks, half of the participants underwent a fear-relevant discrimination training (discrimination between CS+ and the other faces) with or without feedback and the other half a fear-irrelevant discrimination training (discrimination between the width of lines) with or without feedback. US expectancy, arousal, valence ratings, and skin conductance responses (SCR) indicated successful fear acquisition. Importantly, fear-relevant vs. fear-irrelevant discrimination trainings and feedback vs. no feedback reduced generalization as reflected in US expectancy ratings independently from one another. No effects of training condition were found for arousal and valence ratings or SCR. In summary, this is a first indication that fear-relevant discrimination training and feedback can improve the discrimination between threat and safety signals in healthy individuals, at least for learning-related evaluations, but not evaluations of valence or (physiological) arousal.