4.7 Article

Triple network model of brain connectivity changes related to adverse mood effects in an oral contraceptive placebo-controlled trial

期刊

TRANSLATIONAL PSYCHIATRY
卷 13, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s41398-023-02470-x

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the effects of hormonal contraceptives on mood side effects and found that they caused increased connectivity within the default mode network and decreased connectivity within the executive control network. Mood lability was the most consistent and prominent side effect.
Combined oral contraceptives (COC) are among the most commonly used contraceptive methods worldwide, and mood side effects are the major reason for discontinuation of treatment. We here investigate the directed connectivity patterns associated with the mood side effects of an androgenic COC in a double-blind randomized, placebo-controlled trial in women with a history of affective COC side effects (n = 34). We used spectral dynamic causal modeling on a triple network model consisting of the default mode network (DMN), salience network (SN) and executive control network (ECN). Within this framework, we assessed the treatment-related changes in directed connectivity associated with adverse mood side effects. Overall, during COC use, we found a pattern of enhanced connectivity within the DMN and decreased connectivity within the ECN. The dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (SN) mediates an increased recruitment of the DMN by the ECN during treatment. Mood lability was the most prominent COC-induced symptom and also arose as the side effect most consistently related to connectivity changes. Connections that were related to increased mood lability showed increased connectivity during COC treatment, while connections that were related to decreased mood lability showed decreased connectivity during COC treatment. Among these, the connections with the highest effect size could also predict the participants' treatment group above chance.

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

4.7
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