↓ Skip to main content

Doubt in the Insula: Risk Processing in Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Doubt in the Insula: Risk Processing in Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00283
Pubmed ID
Authors

Judy Luigjes, Martijn Figee, Philippe N. Tobler, Wim van den Brink, Bart de Kwaasteniet, Guido van Wingen, Damiaan Denys

Abstract

Extensive cleaning or checking of patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) are often interpreted as strategies to avoid harm and as an expression of the widespread belief that OCD patients are more risk-averse. However, despite its clinical significance, the neural basis of risk attitude in OCD is unknown. Here, we investigated neural activity during risk processing using functional magnetic resonance imaging and simultaneously assessed risk attitude using a separate behavioral paradigm in OCD patients with different symptoms versus healthy controls (HCs). We found opposite insula responses to high versus low risk in OCD patients compared to HCs: a positive correlation between insula activity and risk-aversion in patients versus a negative correlation in controls. Although OCD patients overall were not more risk-averse than controls, there were differences between subgroups of OCD patients: patients with doubt/checking symptoms were more risk-averse than other patients. Taken together, OCD patients show a reversed pattern of risk processing by the insula compared to HCs. Moreover, the data suggest that increased activation of the insula signals an abnormal urge to avoid risks in the subpopulation of OCD patients with doubt and checking symptoms. These results indicate a role for the insula in excessive risk-avoidance relevant to OCD.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 63 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 21%
Student > Master 13 21%
Researcher 3 5%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 5%
Student > Bachelor 2 3%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 20 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 15 24%
Neuroscience 12 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 6%
Philosophy 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 24 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 June 2016.
All research outputs
#14,263,483
of 22,873,031 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#4,596
of 7,167 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#201,155
of 352,704 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#135
of 192 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,873,031 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,167 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 352,704 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 192 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.