Qingqing Zhang1, Xiaoming Li1, Xinying Liu1, Shanshan Liu1, Mengzhu Zhang1, Yueling Liu1, Chunyan Zhu1,2,3,4, Kai Wang1,2,3,4,5. 1. The School of Mental Health and Psychological Sciences, Anhui Medical University, Hefei 230032, China. 2. Anhui Province Key Laboratory of Cognition and Neuropsychiatric Disorders, Hefei 230032, China. 3. Collaborative Innovation Center of Neuropsychiatric Disorders and Mental Health, Hefei 230032, China. 4. Institute of Artificial Intelligence, Hefei Comprehensive National Science Center, Hefei 230011, China. 5. Department of Neurology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei 230022, China.
Abstract
(1) Background: Emotion regulation (ER) is regarded as a core treatment target for depression and other mental illnesses. In recent years, non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) has been extensively used as an intervention for mental illnesses, but there has been no systematic review conducted regarding its effect on emotion regulation. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis of the effectiveness of NIBS for emotion regulation; (2) Methods: Systematic searches were conducted in Embase, Web of Science, PubMed, and Cochrane Library. We analyzed the effects of NIBS on tasks assessing emotion regulation using a random-effects model, and further explored the moderating role of the following factors on transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) studies by conducting subgroup analyses and meta-regression: target electrode placement, return electrode placement, current intensity, target electrode size, and duration of intervention; (3) Results: A total of 17 studies were included. Our meta-analysis indicated a small but significant effect of NIBS on the downregulation of negative emotions. Separate analyses indicated that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) had a medium and significant effect on the downregulation of negative emotions, whereas tDCS had no significant effect. Subgroup analyses showed that the effect of tDCS was moderated by target and return electrode placemen; (4) Conclusions: These results indicate that NIBS had a positive effect on the downregulation of negative emotions. The stimulation protocols should be carefully considered and the underlying mechanisms should be further explored.
(1) Background: Emotion regulation (ER) is regarded as a core treatment target for depression and other mental illnesses. In recent years, non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) has been extensively used as an intervention for mental illnesses, but there has been no systematic review conducted regarding its effect on emotion regulation. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis of the effectiveness of NIBS for emotion regulation; (2) Methods: Systematic searches were conducted in Embase, Web of Science, PubMed, and Cochrane Library. We analyzed the effects of NIBS on tasks assessing emotion regulation using a random-effects model, and further explored the moderating role of the following factors on transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) studies by conducting subgroup analyses and meta-regression: target electrode placement, return electrode placement, current intensity, target electrode size, and duration of intervention; (3) Results: A total of 17 studies were included. Our meta-analysis indicated a small but significant effect of NIBS on the downregulation of negative emotions. Separate analyses indicated that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) had a medium and significant effect on the downregulation of negative emotions, whereas tDCS had no significant effect. Subgroup analyses showed that the effect of tDCS was moderated by target and return electrode placemen; (4) Conclusions: These results indicate that NIBS had a positive effect on the downregulation of negative emotions. The stimulation protocols should be carefully considered and the underlying mechanisms should be further explored.
Authors: Rudi De Raedt; Lemke Leyman; Chris Baeken; Peter Van Schuerbeek; Rob Luypaert; Marie-Anne Vanderhasselt; Udo Dannlowski Journal: Biol Psychol Date: 2010-10-12 Impact factor: 3.251
Authors: Veronika I Müller; Edna C Cieslik; Ilinca Serbanescu; Angela R Laird; Peter T Fox; Simon B Eickhoff Journal: JAMA Psychiatry Date: 2017-01-01 Impact factor: 21.596