von Yvonne Poker ; Sandra von Hardenberg ; Winfried Hofmann ; Ming Tang ; Ulrich Baumann ; Nicolaus Schwerk ; Martin Wetzke ; Viola Lindenthal ; Bernd Auber ; Brigitte Schlegelberger ; Hagen Ott ; Philipp von Bismarck ; Dorothee Viemann ; Frank Dressler ; Christian Klemann ; Anke K. Bergmann
Background:. Affectionate touch, which is vital for mental and physical health, was restricted during the Covid-19 pandemic. This study investigated the association between momentary affectionate touch and subjective well-being, as well as salivary oxytocin and cortisol in everyday life during the pandemic. Methods:. In the first step, we measured anxiety and depression symptoms, loneliness and attitudes toward social touch in a large cross-sectional online survey (N = 1050). From this sample, N = 247 participants completed ecological momentary assessments over 2 days with six daily assessments by answering smartphone-based questions on affectionate touch and momentary mental state, and providing concomitant saliva samples for cortisol and oxytocin assessment. Results:. Multilevel models showed that on a within-person level, affectionate touch was associated with decreased self-reported anxiety, general burden, stress, and increased oxytocin levels. On a between-person level, affectionate touch was associated with decreased cortisol levels and higher happiness. Moreover, individuals with a positive attitude toward social touch experiencing loneliness reported more mental health problems. Conclusions:. Our results suggest that affectionate touch is linked to higher endogenous oxytocin in times of pandemic and lockdown and might buffer stress on a subjective and hormonal level. These findings might have implications for preventing mental burden during social contact restrictions. Funding:. The study was funded by the German Research Foundation, the German Psychological Society, and German Academic Exchange Service.
von Stephan Nebe ; Mario Reuter ; Daniel H. Baker ; Jens Bölte ; Gregor Domes ; Matthias Gamer ; Anne Gärtner ; Carsten Giessing ; Caroline Gurr ; Kirsten Hilger ; Philippe Jawinski ; Louisa Kulke
experimental methods; generalizability; human neuroscience; precision; reliability; sample size
Human neuroscience has always been pushing the boundary of what is measurable. During the last decade, concerns about statistical power and replicability - in science in general, but also specifically in human neuroscience - have fueled an extensive debate. One important insight from this discourse is the need for larger samples, which naturally increases statistical power. An alternative is to increase the precision of measurements, which is the focus of this review. This option is often overlooked, even though statistical power benefits from increasing precision as much as from increasing sample size. Nonetheless, precision has always been at the heart of good scientific practice in human neuroscience, with researchers relying on lab traditions or rules of thumb to ensure sufficient precision for their studies. In this review, we encourage a more systematic approach to precision. We start by introducing measurement precision and its importance for well-powered studies in human neuroscience. Then, determinants for precision in a range of neuroscientific methods (MRI, M/EEG, EDA, Eye-Tracking, and Endocrinology) are elaborated. We end by discussing how a more systematic evaluation of precision and the application of respective insights can lead to an increase in reproducibility in human neuroscience.
von Kim M. Thalwitzer ; Jan Henje Driedger ; Julie Xian ; Afshin Saffari ; Pia Zacher ; Bigna K. Bölsterli ; Sarah McKeown Ruggiero ; Katie Rose Sullivan ; Alexandre N. Datta ; Christoph Kellinghaus ; Jürgen Althaus ; Adelheid Wiemer-Kruel ; Andreas van Baalen ; Armin Pampel ; Michael Alber ; Hilde M. H. Braakman ; Otfried Martin Debus ; Jonas Denecke ; Elke Hobbiebrunken ; Ina Breitweg ; Danielle Diehl ; Hans Christian Eitel ; Janina Gburek-Augustat ; Martin Preisel ; Jan-Ulrich Schlump ; Mirjam Laufs ; Dilbar Mammadova ; Carsten Wurst ; Christine Prager ; Christa Löhr-Nilles ; Peter Martin ; Sven Garbade ; Konrad Platzer ; Ira Benkel-Herrenbrueck ; Kerstin Egler ; Walid Fazeli ; Johannes R. Lemke ; Eva Runkel ; Barbara Klein ; Tobias Linden ; Julian Schröter ; Heike Steffeck ; Bastian Thies ; Florian von Deimling ; Sabine Illsinger ; Ingo Borggräfe ; Georg Classen ; Dagmar Wieczorek ; Georgia Ramantani ; Stefan Kölker ; Georg F. Hoffmann ; Markus Ries ; Ingo Helbig ; Steffen Syrbe
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Pathogenic variants in STXBP1 are among the major genetic causes of neurodevelopmental disorders. Despite the increasing number of individuals diagnosed without a history of epilepsy, little is known about the natural history and developmental trajectories in this subgroup and endpoints for future therapeutic studies are limited to seizure control. - METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional retrospective study using standardized questionnaires for clinicians and caregivers of individuals with STXBP1-related disorders capturing medical histories, genetic findings, and developmental outcomes. Motor and language function were assessed using Gross Motor Function Classification System scores (GMFCS) and a speech impairment score and were compared within and across clinically defined subgroups. - RESULTS: We collected data of 71 individuals with STXBP1-related disorders, including 44 previously unreported individuals. Median age at inclusion was 5.3 years (IQR = 3.5-9.3) with the oldest individual aged 43.8 years. Epilepsy was absent in 18/71 (25%) of individuals. The range of developmental outcomes was broad, including two individuals presenting with close to age-appropriate motor development. 29/61 (48%) individuals were able to walk unassisted and 24/69 (35%) were able to speak single words. Individuals without epilepsy presented with a similar onset and spectrum of phenotypic features but had lower GMFCS scores (median 3 vs. 4, p < 0.01) than individuals with epilepsy. Individuals with epileptic spasms were less likely to walk unassisted than individuals with other seizure types (6% vs. 58%, p < 0.01). Individuals with early epilepsy onset had higher speech impairment scores (p = 0.02) than individuals with later epilepsy onset. - DISCUSSION: We expand the spectrum of STXBP1-related disorders and provide clinical features and developmental trajectories in individuals with and without a history of epilepsy. Individuals with epilepsy, in particular epileptic spasms, and neonatal or early-onset, presented with less favorable motor and language functional outcomes compared to individuals without epilepsy. These findings identify children at risk for severe disease and can serve as comparator for future interventional studies in STXBP1-related disorders.