The characteristics of event-related potentials in generalized anxiety disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Journal of psychiatric research Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-06 DOI:10.1016/j.jpsychires.2024.12.016
Cheng Xie, Chen Xue, Yuxi Li, Xiaobo Liu, Donglin Zhong, Qizu Jin, Juan Li, Rongjiang Jin
{"title":"The characteristics of event-related potentials in generalized anxiety disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Cheng Xie, Chen Xue, Yuxi Li, Xiaobo Liu, Donglin Zhong, Qizu Jin, Juan Li, Rongjiang Jin","doi":"10.1016/j.jpsychires.2024.12.016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Previous studies have reported inconsistent findings regarding event-related potentials (ERPs) abnormalities in individuals with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). This meta-analysis aimed to systematically review and synthesize the existing evidence on ERP alterations in individuals with GAD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Excerpta Medica Database, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database (VIP), Wanfang database, and China Biology Medicine (CBM) databases from inception to November 11, 2024. Gray literature and reference lists were also manually searched. Studies investigating ERP component differences between individuals with GAD and healthy controls were included. Two independent reviewers conducted study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment. Influence and sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the pooled results. Effect sizes (SMD, Hedge's g) were calculated for latency and amplitude differences. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I<sup>2</sup> statistic. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses were conducted to explore the source of heterogeneity. Trim-and-fill analyses were applied to assess potential publication bias. Data synthesis was performed using R (version 4.2.3) software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 37 studies involving 1086 individuals with GAD and 1315 healthy controls were included. The overall risk of bias was rated as low for 25 studies and moderate for 12 studies. Ten ERP components were included in the quantitative meta-analysis: P3, N2, N1, P2, Error Related Negativity (ERN), Correction Related Negativity (CRN), Mismatch Negativity (MMN), P1 (amplitude), Pe, and LPP. Pooled results indicated that individuals with GAD exhibited decreased P3 amplitude (g = -0.54, 95% CI: -0.70 to -0.38, I<sup>2</sup> = 20%, P = 0.22) and increased ERN amplitude (g = -0.42, 95% CI: -0.72 to -0.12, I<sup>2</sup> = 40%, P = 0.11) compared to healthy controls. In addition, delayed latency of P3 (g = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.09 to 0.78, I<sup>2</sup> = 75%, P < 0.01), N2 (g = 0.36, 95% CI: 0.11 to 0.62, I<sup>2</sup> = 30%, P = 0.20), and MMN (g = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.52 to 0.75, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%, P < 0.0001) was observed in individuals with GAD. Due to the limited number of included studies, the results of N170, N1/P2, N270, N400, VPP, BAEP, P1 (latency), P50, EPN and Nf were summarized narratively. Individuals with GAD were reported to have increased N170, N400, and VPP amplitude and delayed P1 latency compared to healthy controls. Age, sex ratio, sample size, diagnostic criteria, task-related modality, and paradigm were identified as potential influencing factors of ERP characteristics.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Individuals with GAD exhibit increased ERN amplitude and decreased P3 amplitude in contrast with healthy controls. In addition, delayed latency of P3, N2, and MMN is detected in individuals with GAD. The identified ERP components in individuals with GAD are associated with attention, cognition, visual perception, error or conflict monitoring, semantic information integration, and auditory sensory memory processes. Due to the limited number of included studies and high heterogeneity, further studies with high quality are needed to confirm these findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":16868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of psychiatric research","volume":"181 ","pages":"470-483"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of psychiatric research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2024.12.016","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Previous studies have reported inconsistent findings regarding event-related potentials (ERPs) abnormalities in individuals with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). This meta-analysis aimed to systematically review and synthesize the existing evidence on ERP alterations in individuals with GAD.

Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Excerpta Medica Database, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database (VIP), Wanfang database, and China Biology Medicine (CBM) databases from inception to November 11, 2024. Gray literature and reference lists were also manually searched. Studies investigating ERP component differences between individuals with GAD and healthy controls were included. Two independent reviewers conducted study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment. Influence and sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the pooled results. Effect sizes (SMD, Hedge's g) were calculated for latency and amplitude differences. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses were conducted to explore the source of heterogeneity. Trim-and-fill analyses were applied to assess potential publication bias. Data synthesis was performed using R (version 4.2.3) software.

Results: A total of 37 studies involving 1086 individuals with GAD and 1315 healthy controls were included. The overall risk of bias was rated as low for 25 studies and moderate for 12 studies. Ten ERP components were included in the quantitative meta-analysis: P3, N2, N1, P2, Error Related Negativity (ERN), Correction Related Negativity (CRN), Mismatch Negativity (MMN), P1 (amplitude), Pe, and LPP. Pooled results indicated that individuals with GAD exhibited decreased P3 amplitude (g = -0.54, 95% CI: -0.70 to -0.38, I2 = 20%, P = 0.22) and increased ERN amplitude (g = -0.42, 95% CI: -0.72 to -0.12, I2 = 40%, P = 0.11) compared to healthy controls. In addition, delayed latency of P3 (g = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.09 to 0.78, I2 = 75%, P < 0.01), N2 (g = 0.36, 95% CI: 0.11 to 0.62, I2 = 30%, P = 0.20), and MMN (g = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.52 to 0.75, I2 = 0%, P < 0.0001) was observed in individuals with GAD. Due to the limited number of included studies, the results of N170, N1/P2, N270, N400, VPP, BAEP, P1 (latency), P50, EPN and Nf were summarized narratively. Individuals with GAD were reported to have increased N170, N400, and VPP amplitude and delayed P1 latency compared to healthy controls. Age, sex ratio, sample size, diagnostic criteria, task-related modality, and paradigm were identified as potential influencing factors of ERP characteristics.

Conclusions: Individuals with GAD exhibit increased ERN amplitude and decreased P3 amplitude in contrast with healthy controls. In addition, delayed latency of P3, N2, and MMN is detected in individuals with GAD. The identified ERP components in individuals with GAD are associated with attention, cognition, visual perception, error or conflict monitoring, semantic information integration, and auditory sensory memory processes. Due to the limited number of included studies and high heterogeneity, further studies with high quality are needed to confirm these findings.

广泛性焦虑障碍的事件相关电位特征:一项系统综述和荟萃分析。
研究目的以往的研究对广泛性焦虑症(GAD)患者的事件相关电位(ERPs)异常的研究结果并不一致。本荟萃分析旨在系统地回顾和综合有关 GAD 患者 ERP 变化的现有证据:在 PubMed、Cochrane 图书馆、Excerpta Medica 数据库、Web of Science、中国国家知识基础设施(CNKI)、中国科技期刊数据库(VIP)、万方数据库和中国生物医学(CBM)数据库中进行了全面的文献检索。此外,还人工检索了灰色文献和参考文献目录。纳入了调查 GAD 患者与健康对照组之间 ERP 成分差异的研究。两位独立审稿人对研究进行了筛选、数据提取和偏倚风险评估。为评估汇总结果的稳健性,还进行了影响和敏感性分析。计算了潜伏期和振幅差异的效应大小(SMD、Hedge's g)。使用 I2 统计量评估异质性。进行元回归和亚组分析以探索异质性的来源。采用修剪和填充分析评估潜在的发表偏倚。数据综合使用 R(4.2.3 版)软件进行:共纳入了 37 项研究,涉及 1086 名 GAD 患者和 1315 名健康对照者。25项研究的总体偏倚风险被评为低,12项研究的偏倚风险被评为中。定量荟萃分析纳入了 10 个 ERP 成分:P3、N2、N1、P2、错误相关负性(ERN)、校正相关负性(CRN)、错配负性(MMN)、P1(振幅)、Pe 和 LPP。汇总结果显示,与健康对照组相比,GAD 患者的 P3 振幅减小(g = -0.54,95% CI:-0.70 至 -0.38,I2 = 20%,P = 0.22),ERN 振幅增大(g = -0.42,95% CI:-0.72 至 -0.12,I2 = 40%,P = 0.11)。此外,P3延迟潜伏期(g = 0.43,95% CI:0.09 至 0.78,I2 = 75%,P 2 = 30%,P = 0.20)和MMN(g = 0.63,95% CI:0.52 至 0.75,I2 = 0%,P 结论:与健康对照组相比,GAD 患者的 ERN 波幅增大,P3 波幅减小。此外,在 GAD 患者中还检测到 P3、N2 和 MMN 的延迟潜伏期。在 GAD 患者身上发现的 ERP 成分与注意力、认知、视觉感知、错误或冲突监测、语义信息整合和听觉记忆过程有关。由于纳入的研究数量有限且异质性较高,因此需要更多高质量的研究来证实这些发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of psychiatric research
Journal of psychiatric research 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
2.10%
发文量
622
审稿时长
130 days
期刊介绍: Founded in 1961 to report on the latest work in psychiatry and cognate disciplines, the Journal of Psychiatric Research is dedicated to innovative and timely studies of four important areas of research: (1) clinical studies of all disciplines relating to psychiatric illness, as well as normal human behaviour, including biochemical, physiological, genetic, environmental, social, psychological and epidemiological factors; (2) basic studies pertaining to psychiatry in such fields as neuropsychopharmacology, neuroendocrinology, electrophysiology, genetics, experimental psychology and epidemiology; (3) the growing application of clinical laboratory techniques in psychiatry, including imagery and spectroscopy of the brain, molecular biology and computer sciences;
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信