4.6 Review

Does heart rate variability predict better executive functioning? A systematic review and meta- analysis

期刊

CORTEX
卷 155, 期 -, 页码 218-236

出版社

ELSEVIER MASSON, CORP OFF
DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2022.07.008

关键词

Autonomic nervous system; Vagal tone; Cognition; Psychophysiology; Embodied brain

资金

  1. European Union under the European Regional Development Fund (FEDER)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the association between vagally-mediated heart rate variability (HRV) and executive functioning. The results showed a small positive association between the two, with vagally-mediated HRV predicting cognitive inhibition and cognitive flexibility more than working memory.
The recent focus on the bidirectional heart-brain interactions in psychoneurophysio-logical research has led to a variety of findings suggesting vagal activity is associated with cognition and, possibly, specifically with executive functioning. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to provide a better understanding of the association between vagally-mediated heart rate variability (HRV) and executive functioning. We included 13 correla-tional studies. We found a small positive association between vagally-mediated HRV and executive functioning (r 1/4 .19, 95% CI .15 to .23, p < .0001) using a quantitative synthesis of existing studies with random-effect models. Conducting meta-regression analyses, we found that vagally-mediated HRV predicts cognitive inhibition and cognitive flexibility more than working memory. In addition to the specific executive function measured, this relationship is moderated by the HRV measurement used, and age. After proposing a theoretical interpretation of the results, we emphasized the need for further research in light of the methodological issues identified in the included studies, and we outline several aspects to consider in future studies. Crown Copyright (c) 2022 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据