Illusory Body Ownership Affects the Cortical Response to Vicarious Somatosensation

Fundamental human feelings such as body ownership (“this” body is “my” body) and vicariousness (first-person-like experience of events occurring to others) are based on multisensory integration. Behavioral links between body ownership and vicariousness have been shown, but the neural underpinnings remain largely unexplored. To fill this gap, we investigated the neural effects of altered body ownership on vicarious somatosensation. While recording functional brain imaging data, first, we altered participants’ body ownership by robotically delivering tactile stimulations (“tactile” stroking) in synchrony or not with videos of a virtual hand being brushed (“visual” stroking). Then, we manipulated vicarious somatosensation by showing videos of the virtual hand being touched by a syringe’s plunger (touch) or needle (pain). Only after the alteration of body ownership (synchronous visuo-tactile stroking) and specifically during late epochs of vicarious somatosensation, vicarious pain was associated with lower activation in premotor and anterior cingulate cortices with respect to vicarious touch. At the methodological level, the present study highlights the importance of the neural response’s temporal evolution. At the theoretical level, it shows that the higher-level (cognitive) impact of a lower-level (sensory) body-related processing (visuo-tactile) is not limited to body ownership but also extends to other psychological body-related domains, such as vicarious somatosensation

Personode: A Toolbox for ICA Map Classification and Individualized ROI Definition

Canonical resting state networks (RSNs) can be obtained through independent component analysis (ICA). RSNs are reproducible across subjects but also present inter-individual differences, which can be used to individualize regions-of-interest (ROI) definition, thus making fMRI analyses more accurate. Unfortunately, no automatic tool for defining subject-specific ROIs exists, making the classification of ICAs as representatives of RSN time-consuming and largely dependent on visual inspection. Here, we present Personode, a user-friendly and open source MATLAB-based toolbox that semi-automatically performs the classification of RSN and allows for defining subject- and group-specific ROIs. To validate the applicability of our new approach and to assess potential improvements compared to previous approaches, we applied Personode to both task-related activation and resting-state data. Our analyses show that for task-related activation analyses, subject-specific spherical ROIs defined with Personode produced higher activity contrasts compared to ROIs derived from single-study and meta-analytic coordinates. We also show that subject-specific irregular ROIs defined with Personode improved ROI-to-ROI functional connectivity analyses.Hence, Personode might be a useful toolbox for ICA map classification into RSNs and group- as well as subject-specific ROI definitions, leading to improved analyses of task-related activation and functional connectivity. Keywords: Functional connectivity; ICA map classification; Independent component analysis; ROI individualization; Resting-state networks; Toolbox

Acceptance of Telemedicine Compared to In-Person Consultation From the Providers' and Users’ Perspectives: Multicenter, Cross-Sectional Study in Dermatology

Background Teledermatology is currently finding its place in modern health care worldwide as a rapidly evolving field. Objective The aim of this study was to investigate the acceptance of teledermatology compared to in-person consultation from the perspective of patients and professionals. Methods This multicenter, cross-sectional pilot study was performed at secondary and tertiary referral centers of dermatology in Switzerland from August 2019 to January 2020. A customized questionnaire addressing demographics and educational data, experience with telemedicine, and presumed willingness to replace in-patient consultations with teledermatology was completed by dermatological patients, dermatologists, and health care workers in dermatology. Results Among a total of 664 participants, the ones with previous telemedicine experience (171/664, 25.8%) indicated a high level of overall experience with it (patients: 73/106, 68.9%, dermatologists: 6/8, 75.0%, and health care workers: 27/34, 79.4%). Patients, dermatologists, and health care workers were most likely willing to replace in-person consultations with teledermatology for minor health issues (353/512, 68.9%; 37/45, 82.2%; and 89/107, 83.2%, respectively). We observed a higher preference for telemedicine among individuals who have already used telemedicine (patients: P<.001, dermatologists: P=.03, and health care workers, P=.005), as well as among patients with higher educational levels (P=.003). Conclusions This study indicates that the preference for teledermatology has a high potential to increase over time since previous experience with telemedicine and a higher level of education were associated with a higher willingness to replace in-patient consultations with telemedicine. We assume that minor skin problems are the most promising issue in teledermatology. Our findings emphasize the need for dermatologists to be actively involved in the transition to teledermatology. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04495036; https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT0449503

Acceptance of Telemedicine Compared to In-Person Consultation From the Providers' and Users’ Perspectives: Multicenter, Cross-Sectional Study in Dermatology

BackgroundTeledermatology is currently finding its place in modern health care worldwide as a rapidly evolving field. ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to investigate the acceptance of teledermatology compared to in-person consultation from the perspective of patients and professionals. MethodsThis multicenter, cross-sectional pilot study was performed at secondary and tertiary referral centers of dermatology in Switzerland from August 2019 to January 2020. A customized questionnaire addressing demographics and educational data, experience with telemedicine, and presumed willingness to replace in-patient consultations with teledermatology was completed by dermatological patients, dermatologists, and health care workers in dermatology. ResultsAmong a total of 664 participants, the ones with previous telemedicine experience (171/664, 25.8%) indicated a high level of overall experience with it (patients: 73/106, 68.9%, dermatologists: 6/8, 75.0%, and health care workers: 27/34, 79.4%). Patients, dermatologists, and health care workers were most likely willing to replace in-person consultations with teledermatology for minor health issues (353/512, 68.9%; 37/45, 82.2%; and 89/107, 83.2%, respectively). We observed a higher preference for telemedicine among individuals who have already used telemedicine (patients: P<.001, dermatologists: P=.03, and health care workers, P=.005), as well as among patients with higher educational levels (P=.003). ConclusionsThis study indicates that the preference for teledermatology has a high potential to increase over time since previous experience with telemedicine and a higher level of education were associated with a higher willingness to replace in-patient consultations with telemedicine. We assume that minor skin problems are the most promising issue in teledermatology. Our findings emphasize the need for dermatologists to be actively involved in the transition to teledermatology. Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04495036; https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT0449503