2021
DOI: 10.1007/s40519-021-01172-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: Purpose Recent evidence from neuroimaging research has shown that eating disorders (EDs) are characterized by alterations in interconnected neural systems, whose characteristics can be usefully described by connectomics tools. The present paper aimed to review the neuroimaging literature in EDs employing connectomic tools, and, specifically, graph theory analysis. Methods A systematic review of the literature was conducted to identify studies employing gra… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 47 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In this regard, some recent graph‐theory based studies evidenced that the thalamus may be involved in some integrative impairments among specific brain areas and circuits in eating disorders and in AN as well (Collantoni et al., 2022).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this regard, some recent graph‐theory based studies evidenced that the thalamus may be involved in some integrative impairments among specific brain areas and circuits in eating disorders and in AN as well (Collantoni et al., 2022).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…After data extraction, the risk of bias in each individual study was evaluated with an index based on the guidelines for neuroimaging research in patients with an eating disorder (Collantoni et al, 2021; Frank et al, 2018; Olivo et al, 2019). It includes 27 items that assess study design, participant characteristics, and analysis methods.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The number of studies investigating the neurobiological reward system in BE has been steadily increasing. Some of these studies have also been the topic of reviews (Bello & Hajnal, 2010; Collantoni et al, 2021; Donnelly et al, 2018; Frank, 2013; Gianni et al, 2020; Hartogsveld et al, 2022b; Hiluy et al, 2021; Kessler et al, 2016; Mele et al, 2020; Steward et al, 2018; Wonderlich et al, 2021; Yu et al, 2022). However, these reviews have often focused on specific brain reward pathways (e.g., dopamine transmission, brain activity, and functional connectivity) and have frequently lacked a clear theoretical framework.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Individuals with EDs show cognitive and neurobiological differences compared to healthy controls that contribute to challenges in certain emotional and executive functioning domains, such as impulsivity and cognitive flexibility, areas that have shown to interfere with problem-solving [ 6 11 ]. For instance, there is evidence of frontostriatal circuit differences in EDs which may alter emotion self-regulatory skill [ 12 , 13 ]. In individuals with EDs, there may also be alterations in insula activity, a brain area that integrates emotional and cognitive information with other sensory information and interoceptive cues [ 6 , 7 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%