Department of Psychology, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida, USA.
Department of Psychology, Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Sci Rep. 2020 Feb 12;10(1):2404. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-59490-6.
This meta-analysis aims to evaluate whether the extant literature justifies any definitive conclusions about whether and how SITBs may be associated with brain differences. A total of 77 papers (N = 4,903) published through January 1, 2019 that compared individuals with and without SITBs were included, resulting in 882 coordinates. A pooled meta-analysis assessing for general risk for SITBs indicated a lack of convergence on structural differences. When all types of control groups were considered, functional differences in the left posterior cingulate cortex (PCC), right amygdala, left hippocampus, and right thalamus were significant using multi-level kernel density analysis (p < 0.05) but nonsignificant using activation-likelihood estimation. These results suggest that a propensity for internally-oriented, emotional processing coupled with under-active pain processing could potentially underlie SITBs, but additional research is needed to test this possibility. Separate analyses for types of SITBs suggested that the brain differences associated with deliberate self-harm were consistent with the overall findings. Checkered moderator effects were detected. Overall, the meta-analytic evidence was not robust. More studies are needed to reach definitive conclusions about whether SITBs are associated with brain differences.
本荟萃分析旨在评估现有的文献是否有任何确凿的结论,可以说明 SITBs 是否以及如何与大脑差异相关。共纳入了 77 篇(N=4903)截至 2019 年 1 月 1 日发表的比较 SITBs 患者和无 SITBs 患者的论文,共 882 个坐标。一项汇总荟萃分析评估了 SITBs 的总体风险,结果表明结构差异没有收敛。当考虑所有类型的对照组时,使用多层次核密度分析,左侧后扣带回皮层(PCC)、右侧杏仁核、左侧海马体和右侧丘脑的功能差异具有统计学意义(p<0.05),而使用激活似然估计则没有统计学意义。这些结果表明,内部导向、情感处理的倾向加上疼痛处理不活跃,可能是 SITBs 的基础,但需要进一步的研究来检验这种可能性。对不同类型的 SITBs 的单独分析表明,与故意自我伤害相关的大脑差异与总体发现一致。检测到有差异的调节因素。总体而言,荟萃分析的证据并不稳健。需要更多的研究来得出关于 SITBs 是否与大脑差异相关的确切结论。