4.4 Article

The scanner as a stressor: Evidence from subjective and neuroendocrine stress parameters in the time course of a functional magnetic resonance imaging session

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY
卷 79, 期 2, 页码 118-126

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2010.09.009

关键词

fMRI; Alpha-amylase; Stress; Mood; Cortisol; Noradrenaline; Sympathetic nervous system; Thalamus

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Subjects participating in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations regularly report anxiety and stress related reactions. This may result in impaired data quality and premature termination of scans. Moreover, cognitive functions and neural substrates can be altered by stress. While prior studies investigated pre-post scan differences in stress reactions only, the present study provides an in-depth analysis of mood changes and hormonal fluctuations during the time course of a typical fMRI session. Thirty-nine subjects participated in the study. Subjective mood, salivary alpha-amylase (sAA) and cortisol were assessed at six time points during the lab visit. Associations between hormonal data and neural correlates of a visual detection task were observed using a region of interest approach applied to the thalamic region. Mood and hormonal levels changed significantly during the experiment. Subjects were most nervous immediately after entering the scanner. SAA was significantly elevated after MRI preparation. A subgroup of n = 5 (12.8%) subjects showed pronounced cortisol responses exceeding 2.5 nmol/l. Preliminary fMRI data revealed an association between sAA levels and left thalamic activity during the first half of the experiment that disappeared during the second half. No significant correlation between cortisol and thalamic activity was observed. Results indicate that an fMRI experiment may elicit subjective and neuroendocrine stress reactions that can influence functional activation patterns. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. 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

4.4
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