Obstetric violence is a misnomer.

The term "obstetric violence" has been used in the legislative language of several countries to protect mothers from abuse during pregnancy. Subsequently, it has been expanded to include a spectrum of obstetric procedures, such as induction of labor, episiotomy, and cesarean delivery, and has surfaced in the peer-reviewed literature. The term "obstetric violence" can be seen as quite strong and emotionally charged, which may lead to misunderstandings or misconceptions. It might be interpreted as implying a deliberate act of violence by healthcare providers when mistreatment can sometimes result from systemic issues, lack of training, or misunderstandings rather than intentional violence. "Obstetric mistreatment" is a more comprehensive term that can encompass a broader range of behaviors and actions. "Violence" generally refers to the intentional use of physical force to cause harm, injury, or damage to another person (eg, physical assault, domestic violence, street fights, or acts of terrorism), whereas "mistreatment" is a more general term and refers to the abuse, harm, or control exerted over another person (such as nonconsensual medical procedures, verbal abuse, disrespect, discrimination and stigmatization, or neglect, to name a few examples). There may be cases where unprofessional personnel may commit mistreatment and violence against pregnant patients, but as obstetrics is dedicated to the health and well-being of pregnant and fetal patients, mistreatment of obstetric patients should never be an intended component of professional obstetric care. It is necessary to move beyond the term "obstetric violence" in discourse and acknowledge and address the structural dimensions of abusive reproductive practices. Similarly, we do not use the term "psychiatric violence" for appropriately used professional procedures in psychiatry, such as electroshock therapy, or use the term "neurosurgical violence" when drilling a burr hole. There is an ongoing need to raise awareness about the potential mistreatment of obstetric patients within the context of abuse against women in general. Using the term "mistreatment in healthcare" instead of the more limited term "obstetric violence" is more appropriate and applies to all specialties when there is unprofessional abuse and mistreatment, such as biased care, neglect, emotional abuse (verbal), or physical abuse, including performing procedures that are unnecessary, unindicated, or without informed patient consent. Healthcare providers must promote unbiased, respectful, and patient-centered professional care; provide an ethical framework for all healthcare personnel; and work toward systemic change to prevent any mistreatment or abuse in our specialty.

The exciting potential for ChatGPT in obstetrics and gynecology.

Natural language processing-the branch of artificial intelligence concerned with the interaction between computers and human language-has advanced markedly in recent years with the introduction of sophisticated deep-learning models. Improved performance in natural language processing tasks, such as text and speech processing, have fueled impressive demonstrations of these models' capabilities. Perhaps no demonstration has been more impactful to date than the introduction of the publicly available online chatbot ChatGPT in November 2022 by OpenAI, which is based on a natural language processing model known as a Generative Pretrained Transformer. Through a series of questions posed by the authors about obstetrics and gynecology to ChatGPT as prompts, we evaluated the model's ability to handle clinical-related queries. Its answers demonstrated that in its current form, ChatGPT can be valuable for users who want preliminary information about virtually any topic in the field. Because its educational role is still being defined, we must recognize its limitations. Although answers were generally eloquent, informed, and lacked a significant degree of mistakes or misinformation, we also observed evidence of its weaknesses. A significant drawback is that the data on which the model has been trained are apparently not readily updated. The specific model that was assessed here, seems to not reliably (if at all) source data from after 2021. Users of ChatGPT who expect data to be more up to date need to be aware of this drawback. An inability to cite sources or to truly understand what the user is asking suggests that it has the capability to mislead. Responsible use of models like ChatGPT will be important for ensuring that they work to help but not harm users seeking information on obstetrics and gynecology.

The impact of birth settings on pregnancy outcomes in the United States.

In the United States, 98.3% of patients give birth in hospitals, 1.1% give birth at home, and 0.5% give birth in freestanding birth centers. This review investigated the impact of birth settings on birth outcomes in the United States. Presently, there are insufficient data to evaluate levels of maternal mortality and severe morbidity according to place of birth. Out-of-hospital births are associated with fewer interventions such as episiotomies, epidural anesthesia, operative deliveries, and cesarean deliveries. When compared with hospital births, there are increased rates of avoidable adverse perinatal outcomes in out-of-hospital births in the United States, both for those with and without risk factors. In one recent study, the neonatal mortality rates were significantly elevated for all planned home births: 13.66 per 10,000 live births (242/177,156; odds ratio, 4.19; 95% confidence interval, 3.62-4.84; P<.0001) vs 3.27 per 10,000 live births for in-hospital Certified Nurse-Midwife-attended births (745/2,280,044; odds ratio, 1). These differences increased further when patients were stratified by recognized risk factors such as breech presentation, multiple gestations, nulliparity, advanced maternal age, and postterm pregnancy. Causes of the increased perinatal morbidity and mortality include deliveries of patients with increased risks, absence of standardized criteria to exclude high-risk deliveries, and that most midwives attending out-of-hospital births in the United States do not meet the gold standard for midwifery regulation, the International Confederation of Midwives' Global Standards for Midwifery Education. As part of the informed consent process, pregnant patients interested in out-of-hospital births should be informed of its increased perinatal risks. Hospital births should be supported for all patients, especially those with increased risks.

Addressing challenges related to the professional practice of abortion post-Roe.

The landmark Roe vs Wade Supreme Court decision in 1973 established a constitutional right to abortion. In June 2022, the Dobbs vs Jackson Women's Health Organization Supreme Court decision brought an end to the established professional practice of abortion throughout the United States. Rights-based reductionism and zealotry threaten the professional practice of abortion. Rights-based reductionism is generally the view that moral or ethical issues can be reduced exclusively to matters of rights. In relation to abortion, there are 2 opposing forms of rights-based reductionism, namely fetal rights reductionism, which emphasizes the rights for the fetus while disregarding the rights and autonomy of the pregnant patient, and pregnant patient rights reductionism, which supports unlimited abortion without regards for the fetus. The 2 positions are irreconcilable. This article provides historical examples of the destructive nature of zealotry, which is characterized by extreme devotion to one's beliefs and an intolerant stance to opposing viewpoints, and of the importance of enlightenment to limit zealotry. This article then explores the professional responsibility model as a clinically ethically sound approach to overcome the clashing forms of rights-based reductionism and zealotry and to address the professional practice of abortion. The professional responsibility model refers to the ethical and professional obligations that obstetricians and other healthcare providers have toward pregnant patients, fetuses, and the society at large. It provides a more balanced and nuanced approach to the abortion debate, avoiding the pitfalls of reductionism and zealotry, and allows both the rights of the woman and the obligations to pregnant and fetal patients to be considered alongside broader ethical, medical, and societal implications. Constructive and respectful dialogue is crucial in addressing diverse perspectives and finding common ground. Embracing the professional responsibility model enables professionals to manage abortion responsibly, thereby prioritizing patients' interests and navigating between absolutist viewpoints to find balanced ethical solutions.

Anger: an underappreciated destructive force in healthcare.

Anger is an emotional state that occurs when unexpected things happen to or around oneself and is "an emotional state that varies in intensity from mild irritation to intense fury and rage." It is defined as "a strong feeling of displeasure and usually of antagonism," an emotion characterized by tension and hostility arising from frustration, real or imagined injury by another, or perceived injustice. It can manifest itself in behaviors designed to remove the object of the anger (e.g., determined action) or behaviors designed merely to express the emotion. For the Roman philosopher Seneca anger is not an uncontrollable, impulsive, or instinctive reaction. It is, rather, the cognitive assent that such initial reactions to the offending action or words are in fact unjustified. It is, rather, the cognitive assent that such initial reactions to the offending action or words are in fact unjustified. It seems that the year 2022 was a year when many Americans were plainly angry. "Why is everyone so angry?" the New York Times asked in the article "The Year We Lost It." We believe that Seneca is correct in that anger is unacceptable. Anger is a negative emotion that must be controlled, and Seneca provides us with the tools to avoid and destroy anger. Health care professionals will be more effective, content, and happier if they learn more about Seneca's writings about anger and implement his wisdom on anger from over 2000 years ago.

The far-reaching impact of abortion bans: reproductive care and beyond.

On 24 June 2022, the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, a 49-year-old precedent that provided federal constitutional protection for abortions up to the point of foetal viability, returning jurisdiction to the individual states. Restrictions that came into effect automatically in several states, and are anticipated in others, will severely limit access to abortions in approximately half of the US. Even though every state allows for exceptions to the abortion bans, in some instances these exceptions can be used to preserve the health of a pregnant patient, while in other instances, only to preserve their life. The vague and confusing nature of the abortion ban exceptions threatens to compromise the standard of care for patients with pregnancy complications that are distinct from abortions, such as nonviable pregnancies, miscarriages, and ectopic pregnancies. Additionally, we envision challenges for the treatment of women with certain autoimmune conditions, pregnant cancer patients, and patients contemplating preimplantation genetic diagnosis as part of assisted reproductive technologies. The abortion ban exceptions will impact and interfere with the medical care of pregnant and non-pregnant patient populations alike and are poised to create a medical and public health crisis unlike any other one from the recent past.

[THE USE OF VAGINAL RINGS FOR THE TREATMENT OF GENITAL ORGAN PROLAPSE].

INTRODUCTION: The rise in women's age globally, as well as lifetime hard physical work and high parity rate in the third world countries, is a substantial cause for female genital organ prolapse of variable degrees of severity. This, in turn, has a negative effect on the function of the affected women. The definitive treatment for this condition is surgery of various types in accordance with the anatomic injury, although it is not easily available throughout the world. Hence the use of vaginal pessaries, which is quite prevalent among the affected women, mainly in third world countries. These contraptions enable fixation of the prolapsed female pelvic organs in the pelvis and prevent their descent to the vagina and beyond. The most prevalent vaginal ring is the pessary ring, although a large variety of vaginal rings are available. In this article the authors review some of the aspects regarding the use of vaginal rings for pelvic organ prolapse. Generally, the use of these rings was found safe and effective - both by physicians as well as users, however, reports of some negative complications related to the use of these devices have been published. Another clinical experimental aspect of the use of these rings is to try to prevent premature delivery in pregnant women. Currently, this treatment option is still regarded as being controversial in terms of its effectiveness for this purpose.

Predicting risk for Alcohol Use Disorder using longitudinal data with multimodal biomarkers and family history: a machine learning study.

Predictive models have succeeded in distinguishing between individuals with Alcohol use Disorder (AUD) and controls. However, predictive models identifying who is prone to develop AUD and the biomarkers indicating a predisposition to AUD are still unclear. Our sample (n = 656) included offspring and non-offspring of European American (EA) and African American (AA) ancestry from the Collaborative Study of the Genetics of Alcoholism (COGA) who were recruited as early as age 12 and were unaffected at first assessment and reassessed years later as AUD (DSM-5) (n = 328) or unaffected (n = 328). Machine learning analysis was performed for 220 EEG measures, 149 alcohol-related single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) from a recent large Genome-wide Association Study (GWAS) of alcohol use/misuse and two family history (mother DSM-5 AUD and father DSM-5 AUD) features using supervised, Linear Support Vector Machine (SVM) classifier to test which features assessed before developing AUD predict those who go on to develop AUD. Age, gender, and ancestry stratified analyses were performed. Results indicate significant and higher accuracy rates for the AA compared with the EA prediction models and a higher model accuracy trend among females compared with males for both ancestries. Combined EEG and SNP features model outperformed models based on only EEG features or only SNP features for both EA and AA samples. This multidimensional superiority was confirmed in a follow-up analysis in the AA age groups (12-15, 16-19, 20-30) and EA age group (16-19). In both ancestry samples, the youngest age group achieved higher accuracy score than the two other older age groups. Maternal AUD increased the model's accuracy in both ancestries' samples. Several discriminative EEG measures and SNPs features were identified, including lower posterior gamma, higher slow wave connectivity (delta, theta, alpha), higher frontal gamma ratio, higher beta correlation in the parietal area, and 5 SNPs: rs4780836, rs2605140, rs11690265, rs692854, and rs13380649. Results highlight the significance of sampling uniformity followed by stratified (e.g., ancestry, gender, developmental period) analysis, and wider selection of features, to generate better prediction scores allowing a more accurate estimation of AUD development.

Neonatal outcomes of births in freestanding birth centers and hospitals in the United States, 2016-2019.

BACKGROUND: Births in freestanding birth centers have more than doubled between 2007 and 2019. Although birthing centers, which are defined by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists as ". . . freestanding facilities that are not hospitals," are being promoted as offering women fewer interventions than hospitals, there are limited recent data available on neonatal outcomes in these settings. OBJECTIVE: To compare several important measures of neonatal safety between 2 United States birth settings and birth attendants: deliveries in freestanding birth centers and hospital deliveries by midwives and physicians. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study using the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, and Division of Vital Statistics natality online database for the years 2016 to 2019. All term, singleton, low-risk births were eligible for inclusion. The study outcomes were several neonatal outcomes including neonatal death, neonatal seizures, 5-minute Apgar scores of <4 and <7, and neonatal death in nulliparous and in multiparous women. Outcomes were compared between the following 3 groups: births in freestanding birth centers, in-hospital births by a physician, and in-hospital births by a midwife. The prevalence of each neonatal outcome among the different groups was compared using Pearson chi-squared test, with the in-hospital midwife births being the reference group. Multivariate logistic regression models were performed to account for several potential confounding factors such as maternal prepregnancy body mass index, maternal weight gain, parity, gestational weeks, and neonatal birthweight and calculated as adjusted odds ratio. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 9,894,978 births; 8,689,467 births (87.82%) were in-hospital births by MDs and DOs, 1,131,398 (11.43%) were in-hospital births by midwives, and 74,113 (0.75%) were births in freestanding birth centers. Freestanding birth center deliveries were less likely to be to non-Hispanic Black or Hispanic, less likely to women with public insurance, less likely to be women with their first pregnancy, and more likely to be women with advanced education and to have pregnancies at ≥40 weeks' gestation. Births in freestanding birth center had a 4-fold increase in neonatal deaths (3.64 vs 0.95 per 10,000 births: adjusted odds ratio, 4.00; 95% confidence interval, 2.62-6.1), a more than 7-fold increase in neonatal deaths for nulliparous patients (6.8 vs 0.92 per 10,000 births: adjusted odds ratio, 7.7; 95% confidence interval, 4.42-13.76), a more than 2-fold increase in neonatal seizures (3.91 vs 1.94 per 10,000 births: adjusted odds ratio, 2.19; 95% confidence interval, 1.48-3.22), and a more than 7-fold increase of a 5-minute Apgar score of <4 (194.84 vs 28.5 per 10,000 births: adjusted odds ratio, 7.46; 95% confidence interval, 7-7.95). Compared with hospital midwife deliveries, hospital physician deliveries had significantly higher adverse neonatal outcomes (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Births in United States freestanding birth centers are associated with an increased risk of adverse neonatal outcomes such as neonatal deaths, seizures, and low 5-minute Apgar scores. Therefore, when counseling women about the location of birth, it should be conveyed that births in freestanding birth centers are not among the safest birth settings for neonates compared with hospital births attended by either midwives or physicians.

Mifepristone: A Safe Method of Medical Abortion and Self-Managed Medical Abortion in the Post-Roe Era.

BACKGROUND: The U.S. Supreme Court's Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision on June 24, 2022 effectively overturned federal constitutional protections for abortion that have existed since 1973 and returned jurisdiction to the states. Several states implemented abortion bans, some of which banned abortion after 6 weeks and others that permit abortion under limited exceptions, such as if the health or the life of the woman is in danger. Other states introduced bills that define life as beginning at fertilization. As a result of these new and proposed laws, the future availability of mifepristone, one of two drugs used for medical abortion in the United States, has become the topic of intense debate and speculation. AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY: Although its safety and effectiveness has been confirmed by many studies, the use of mifepristone has been politicized regularly since its approval. Areas of future study include mifepristone for induction termination and fetal demise in the third trimester and the management of leiomyoma. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Society of Family Planning, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the World Health Organization. THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES: The use of no-touch medical abortion, which entails providing a medical abortion via a telehealth platform without a screening ultrasound or bloodwork, expanded during the COVID-19 pandemic, and studies have confirmed its safety. With the Dobbs decision, legal abortion will be less accessible and, consequently, self-managed abortion with mifepristone and misoprostol will become more prevalent. CONCLUSIONS: Mifepristone and misoprostol are extremely safe medications with many applications. In the current changing political climate, physicians and pregnancy-capable individuals must have access to these medications.

Emergency Contraception: Access and Challenges at Times of Uncertainty.

BACKGROUND: The UN Commission on Life-Saving Commodities for Women and Children identified emergency contraceptive pills as 1 of the 13 essential underused, low-cost, and high-impact commodities that could save the lives of millions of women and children worldwide. In the US, 2 emergency contraceptive regimens are currently approved, and their most plausible mechanism of action involves delaying and/or inhibiting ovulation. AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY: Abortion and contraception are recognized as essential components of reproductive health care. In the US, in the wake of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization Supreme Court decision on June 24, 2022, 26 states began to or are expected to severely restrict abortion. It is anticipated that these restrictions will increase the demand for emergency contraception (EC). Several obstacles to EC access have been described, and these include cost, hurdles to over-the-counter purchase, low awareness, myths about their mechanisms of action, widespread misinformation, and barriers that special populations face in accessing them. The politicization of EC is a major factor limiting access. Improving sex education and health literacy, along with eHealth literacy, are important initiatives to improve EC uptake and access. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, The Guttmacher Institute, Society of Family Planning, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the World Health Organization, The United Nations. THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES: A randomized noninferiority trial showed that the 52 mg levonorgestrel intrauterine device was noninferior to the copper intrauterine device when used as an EC method in the first 5 days after unprotected intercourse. This is a promising and highly effective emergency contraceptive option, particularly for overweight and obese patients, and a contraceptive option with a different bleeding profile than the copper intrauterine device. CONCLUSIONS: EC represents an important facet of medicine and public health. The 2 medical regimens currently approved in the US are very effective, have virtually no medical contraindications, and novel formulations are actively being investigated to make them more convenient and effective for all patient populations. Barriers to accessing EC, including the widespread presence of contraception deserts , threaten to broaden and accentuate the already existing inequities and disparities in society, at a time when they have reached the dimensions of a public health crisis.

Professionally responsible coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination counseling of obstetrical and gynecologic patients.

The development of coronavirus disease 2019 vaccines in the current and planned clinical trials is essential for the success of a public health response. This paper focuses on how physicians should implement the results of these clinical trials when counseling patients who are pregnant, planning to become pregnant, breastfeeding or planning to breastfeed about vaccines with government authorization for clinical use. Determining the most effective approach to counsel patients about coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination is challenging. We address the professionally responsible counseling of 3 groups of patients-those who are pregnant, those planning to become pregnant, and those breastfeeding or planning to breastfeed. We begin with an evidence-based account of the following 5 major challenges: the limited evidence base, the documented increased risk for severe disease among pregnant coronavirus disease 2019-infected patients, conflicting guidance from government agencies and professional associations, false information about coronavirus disease 2019 vaccines, and maternal mistrust and vaccine hesitancy. We subsequently provide evidence-based, ethically justified, practical guidance for meeting these challenges in the professionally responsible counseling of patients about coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination. To guide the professionally responsible counseling of patients who are pregnant, planning to become pregnant, and breastfeeding or planning to breastfeed, we explain how obstetrician-gynecologists should evaluate the current clinical information, why a recommendation of coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination should be made, and how this assessment should be presented to patients during the informed consent process with the goal of empowering them to make informed decisions. We also present a proactive account of how to respond when patients refuse the recommended vaccination, including the elements of the legal obligation of informed refusal and the ethical obligation to ask patients to reconsider. During this process, the physician should be alert to vaccine hesitancy, ask patients to express their hesitation and reasons for it, and respectfully address them. In contrast to the conflicting guidance from government agencies and professional associations, evidence-based professional ethics in obstetrics and gynecology provides unequivocal and clear guidance: Physicians should recommend coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination to patients who are pregnant, planning to become pregnant, and breastfeeding or planning to breastfeed. To prevent widening of the health inequities, build trust in the health benefits of vaccination, and encourage coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine and treatment uptake, in addition to recommending coronavirus disease 2019 vaccinations, physicians should engage with communities to tailor strategies to overcome mistrust and deliver evidence-based information, robust educational campaigns, and novel approaches to immunization.

A Shift in Medical Education During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has abruptly affected every aspect of people's daily lives worldwide. Just like every other area, the medical field has been dramatically impacted by the need to care for a large number of patients while at the same time protecting staff, patients, and their families. Changes in the wake of the pandemic called for the prompt and extensive rechanneling and re-organization of resources. The pandemic has opened challenges and concerns for patient safety, starting with the early recognition that individuals, including medical staff, may spread the virus during the asymptomatic phase. Many healthcare facilities faced resource-limited settings, including challenges in the availability of personal protective equipment for healthcare providers. Additionally, the pandemic has disrupted medical education, both at the undergraduate and at the graduate levels, and according to many predictions, its effects may forever transform the ways medical education is delivered. In this chapter, we are exploring the history of medical education, describe changes in medical education experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic, and predict some of the considerations worth taking into account when envisioning the future of medical education.

Characterization of women with gestational diabetes who failed to achieve glycemic control by lifestyle modifications.

PURPOSE: To identify specific characteristics of women diagnosed with gestational diabetes who failed to achieve good glycemic control by lifestyle modifications only. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of women carrying a singleton pregnancy diagnosed with gestational diabetes. The cohort included 314 women who achieved good glycemic control by lifestyle modifications and 328 women who required anti-diabetic medications. Lifestyle modifications included medical nutrition therapy and physical exercise recommendations. Anti-diabetic medications included either oral treatment with metformin or glyburide and\or insulin. RESULTS: Women in the lifestyle modifications group were younger (32.87 vs. 33.79 years, p = 0.012) and had lower pre-pregnancy body-mass-index (25.86 vs. 27.93 kg/m2, p < 0.001). Glucose challenge test (GCT) was significantly lower in the lifestyle modifications group (158.31 vs. 171.04 mg/dL in the anti-diabetic treatment group, p < 0.001). Moreover, fasting oral-glucose-tolerance-test (fOGTT) results were significantly lower in the lifestyle modifications group (88.22 vs. 96.34 mg/dL in the anti-diabetic treatment group, p < 0.001). In a receiver-operator-curve analysis, GCT + 4*fOGTT, was the best model to predict lifestyle modifications failure with an area under the curve of 0.7419. Higher rates of vaginal delivery and lower rates of maternal hypoglycemia in the lifestyle modifications group were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Maternal baseline characteristics and diabetes diagnostic parameters may predict which women will fail to achieve good glycemic control solely by lifestyle modifications.

Expanding the concept of the professional integrity of obstetrics during a public health emergency.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has placed great demands on many hospitals to maximize their capacity to care for affected patients. The requirement to reassign space has created challenges for obstetric services. We describe the nature of that challenge for an obstetric service in New York City. This experience raised an ethical challenge: whether it would be consistent with professional integrity to respond to a public health emergency with a plan for obstetric services that would create an increased risk of rare maternal mortality. We answered this question using the conceptual tools of professional ethics in obstetrics, especially the professional virtue of integrity. A public health emergency requires frameshifting from an individual-patient perspective to a population-based perspective. We show that an individual-patient-based, beneficence-based deliberative clinical judgment is not an adequate basis for organizational policy in response to a public health emergency. Instead, physicians, especially those in leadership positions, must frameshift to population-based clinical ethical judgment that focuses on reduction of mortality as much as possible in the entire population of patients served by a healthcare organization.

Tired and misconnected: A breakdown of brain modularity following sleep deprivation.

Sleep deprivation (SD) critically affects a range of cognitive and affective functions, typically assessed during task performance. Whether such impairments stem from changes to the brain's intrinsic functional connectivity remain largely unknown. To examine this hypothesis, we applied graph theoretical analysis on resting-state fMRI data derived from 18 healthy participants, acquired during both sleep-rested and sleep-deprived states. We hypothesized that parameters indicative of graph connectivity, such as modularity, will be impaired by sleep deprivation and that these changes will correlate with behavioral outcomes elicited by sleep loss. As expected, our findings point to a profound reduction in network modularity without sleep, evident in the limbic, default-mode, salience and executive modules. These changes were further associated with behavioral impairments elicited by SD: a decrease in salience module density was associated with worse task performance, an increase in limbic module density was predictive of stronger amygdala activation in a subsequent emotional-distraction task and a shift in frontal hub lateralization (from left to right) was associated with increased negative mood. Altogether, these results portray a loss of functional segregation within the brain and a shift towards a more random-like network without sleep, already detected in the spontaneous activity of the sleep-deprived brain. Hum Brain Mapp 38:3300-3314, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Functional connectivity dynamics during film viewing reveal common networks for different emotional experiences.

Recent theoretical and empirical work has highlighted the role of domain-general, large-scale brain networks in generating emotional experiences. These networks are hypothesized to process aspects of emotional experiences that are not unique to a specific emotional category (e.g., "sadness," "happiness"), but rather that generalize across categories. In this article, we examined the dynamic interactions (i.e., changing cohesiveness) between specific domain-general networks across time while participants experienced various instances of sadness, fear, and anger. We used a novel method for probing the network connectivity dynamics between two salience networks and three amygdala-based networks. We hypothesized, and found, that the functional connectivity between these networks covaried with the intensity of different emotional experiences. Stronger connectivity between the dorsal salience network and the medial amygdala network was associated with more intense ratings of emotional experience across six different instances of the three emotion categories examined. Also, stronger connectivity between the dorsal salience network and the ventrolateral amygdala network was associated with more intense ratings of emotional experience across five out of the six different instances. Our findings demonstrate that a variety of emotional experiences are associated with dynamic interactions of domain-general neural systems.