Dataset Information

Bridging executive function and disinhibited eating among youth: A network analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Poorer executive function (EF) has been linked to disinhibited eating in youth, suggesting poor EF predisposes toward obesity, yet the specific nature and extent of interconnections between facets of these domains is unclear. Network analysis provides a promising framework for elucidating the relationship between poor EF and disinhibited eating, and offers insights into potential maintenance processes.

Method

Among youth ages 8-17 years, a regularized partial correlation network of EF and disinhibited eating facets was estimated to examine expected influence centrality and bridge expected influence. Computerized neurocognitive tasks assessed EF variables, including decision-making, general and food-related inhibitory control, delayed gratification, cognitive flexibility, and working memory. Disinhibited eating variables included total carbohydrate-fat intake at a laboratory test meal and self-reported eating in the absence of hunger, emotional eating, and loss-of-control eating severity.

Results

In the current sample (N = 248; M_age = 12.5; 54.8% female; 43.5% non-Hispanic White; 25.8% non-Hispanic Black; BMI %ile = 65.8 ± 27.8), emotional eating in response to depressive symptoms emerged as a central symptom in the network. Carbohydrate-fat intake had the highest bridge expected influence and was most strongly connected to general inhibitory control (part r = .14).

Discussion

The link between general inhibitory control and objective palatable food intake may be particularly salient in maintaining maladaptive eating behavior. Interventions targeting behavioral disinhibition may disrupt associations among a network of disinhibited eating facets in youth and should be targets for longitudinal research.

SUBMITTER: Byrne ME

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8119329 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Executive function is a quintessential human capacity that emerges late in development and displays different developmental trends in males and females. Sex differences in executive function in youth have been linked to vulnerability to psychopathology as well as to behaviors that impinge on health, wellbeing, and longevity. Yet, the neurobiological basis of these differences is not well understood, in part due to the spatiotemporal complexity inherent in patterns of brain network maturation supporting executive function. Here we test the hypothesis that sex differences in impulsivity in youth stem from sex differences in the controllability of structural brain networks as they rewire over development. Combining methods from network neuroscience and network control theory, we characterize the network control properties of structural brain networks estimated from diffusion imaging data acquired in males and females in a sample of 879 youth aged 8-22 years. We summarize the control properties of these networks by estimating average and modal controllability, two statistics that probe the ease with which brain areas can drive the network towards easy versus difficult-to-reach states. We find that females have higher modal controllability in frontal, parietal, and subcortical regions while males have higher average controllability in frontal and subcortical regions. Furthermore, controllability profiles in males are negatively related to the false positive rate on a continuous performance task, a common measure of impulsivity. Finally, we find associations between average controllability and individual differences in activation during an n-back working memory task. Taken together, our findings support the notion that sex differences in the controllability of structural brain networks can partially explain sex differences in executive function. Controllability of structural brain networks also predicts features of task-relevant activation, suggesting the potential for controllability to represent context-specific constraints on network state more generally.

Project description:Background:Cognitive deficits are implicated in theoretical explanatory models for binge eating disorder (BED). Furthermore, evidence suggest that alterations in executive function may underlie symptoms in BED. The current systematic review and meta-analysis provides an update on executive functioning in individuals with BED. Methods:Literature searches (up to November 2019) were conducted in electronic databases combining binge eating or BED with executive functions. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement guidelines was used. Studies of any design comparing adults with BED with those without BED in executive function domains were selected. Methodological quality of studies was based on the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Results:Of 1,983 citations identified, 28 case-control studies met inclusion criteria for this review. Six meta-analyses that examined four domains (decision-making, cognitive flexibility, inhibitory control, and working memory) were conducted. The only meta-analysis to show a significant difference in executive functioning between BED and obese controls was working memory (SMD = 0.32, 95% IC: -0.60, -0.03; p = 0.028), with an effect size of small magnitude. Qualitative inspection of the literature indicated mixed findings for control inhibition, decision making and cognitive flexibility in individuals with BED compared to controls (obese or normal weight). In addition, people with BED showed poorer problem solving performance, but similar planning abilities to obese controls. Conclusions:Individuals with BED were found to show worse performance on working memory tasks compared to obese individuals without the disorder. The findings did not provide definitive evidence of alterations in other aspects of executive functioning. Interest in executive functioning in people with BED is increasing but is limited by insufficient data from small studies with varied methodology. Future studies should focus on using similar tests and outcome measures, in order to enable more pertinent comparisons across studies.