Search bioRxivSearch

Biology subjects

Dougherty, S. P.

Publications and source records attributed to Dougherty, S. P..

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Blunted Neural Reward Responsiveness and Recent Suicidal Ideation in Children and Adolescents: Failure to Replicate Across Two Independent Samples

A recent study by Tsypes and colleagues (2019) found that children with recent suicidal ideation had blunted neural reward processing, as measured by the reward positivity (RewP), compared to matched controls, and that this difference was driven by reduced neural responses to monetary loss, rather than to reward. Here, we aimed to conceptually replicate and extend these findings in two samples (n = 264, 27 with suicidal ideation; and n = 314, 49 with suicidal ideation at baseline) of children and adolescents (11 to 15 years and 8 to 15 years, respectively). Results from both samples showed no evidence that children and adolescents with suicidal ideation have abnormal reward or loss processing, nor that reward processing predicts suicidal ideation two years later. The results highlight the need for greater statistical power, as well as continued research examining the neural underpinnings of suicidal thoughts and behaviors.

neuroscience

Suicidal thoughts, behaviors, and event-related potentials: A meta-analysis

BackgroundSuicidal thoughts and behaviors (STBs) are thought to result from, at least in part, abnormalities in various neural systems. Event-related potentials (ERPs) are a useful method for studying neural activity and can be leveraged to study neural deficits related to STBs; however, it is unknown how effective ERPs are at differentiating various STB groups. The present meta-analysis examined how well ERPs can differentiate (a) those with and without suicidal ideation, (b) those with and without suicide attempts, (c) those with different levels of suicide risk, and (d) differences between those with suicide attempts versus those with suicidal ideation only. MethodThis meta-analysis included 208 effect sizes from 2,517 participants from 27 studies. We used a random-effects meta-analysis using a restricted maximum likelihood estimator with robust variance estimation. We meta-analyzed ERP-STB combinations that had at least three effect sizes across two or more studies. ResultsA qualitative review found that for each ERP and STB combination, the literature is highly mixed. Our meta-analyses largely did not find significant relationships between STBs and ERPs. We also found that the literature is likely severely underpowered, with most studies only being sufficiently powered to detect unrealistically large effect sizes. ConclusionsOur results provided little-to-no support for a reliable relationship between the ERPs assessed and STBs. However, the current literature is severely underpowered, and there are many methodological weaknesses that must be resolved before making this determination. We recommend large-scale collaboration and improvements in measurement practices to combat the issues in this literature.

neuroscience