| Literature DB >> 23497150 |
Mario A Parra1, Vivek Pattan, Dichelle Wong, Anna Beaglehole, Jane Lonie, Hong I Wan, Garry Honey, Jeremy Hall, Heather C Whalley, Stephen M Lawrie.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Relative to intentional memory encoding, which quickly declines in Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's disease (AD), incidental memory for emotional stimuli appears to deteriorate more slowly. We hypothesised that tests of incidental emotional memory may inform on different aspects of cognitive decline in MCI and AD.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23497150 PMCID: PMC3599533 DOI: 10.1186/1471-244X-13-76
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Psychiatry ISSN: 1471-244X Impact factor: 3.630
Demographic and psychometric characteristics of the three groups of participants
| | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 74 (8.89) | 76 (9.03) | 78 (7.56) | 0.57 | |||||
| 4:6 | 3:7 | 5:5 | ||||||
| 94.80 (4.54) | 86.50 (5.50) | 72.10 (10.35) | 27.42 | < 0.001 | 0.043 | 0.000 | 0.000 | |
| 29.10 (1.60) | 27.50 (2.22) | 23.60 (3.37) | 15.35 | < 0.001 | 0.357 | 0.000 | 0.002 | |
| 17.60 (0.97) | 17.10 (1.10) | 14.80 (2.20) | 9.57 | 0.001 | 1.000 | 0.001 | 0.007 | |
| 23.90 (2.23) | 17.90 (3.96) | 11.30 (4.37) | 29.96 | 0.000 | 0.003 | 0.000 | 0.001 | |
| 12.70 (1.49) | 11.00 (1.33) | 8.20 (2.66) | 13.98 | 0.000 | 0.175 | 0.000 | 0.009 | |
| 25.60 (0.70) | 24.90 (1.60) | 23.10 (2.51) | 5.33 | 0.011 | 1.000 | 0.011 | 0.092 | |
| 15.40 (0.70) | 15.60 (0.52) | 14.10 (1.66) | 5.65 | 0.009 | 1.000 | 0.037 | 0.014 | |
| 118 (7.70) | 116 (6.88) | 108 (10.60) | 4.35 | 0.028 | 1.000 | 0.024 | 0.148 | |
(*) Sub-scores of ACE-R. The minimum educational qualification achieved by the participants recruited into the study was high-school.
Figure 1Behavioural data from the scanner and post-scanner emotional memory tests from the three groups of participants (error bars represent the standard errors of the mean). (a) Number of button presses while participants observed the images within the fMRI scanner. (b) Corrected recognition in the post-scan memory test. (c &d) Variables of the Signal Detection Theory which inform on sensitivity (c) and response bias (d).
Figure 2Within group activation maps for HC (a, b, c), MCI patients (d, e, f) and AD patients (g, h, i). Images thresholded at p = 0.01 uncorrected for illustration purposes only, all statistical comparisons performed at p = 0.001 uncorrected threshold, as described in methods section.
Random effects analysis between groups
| 0.06 | 38 | 3.67 | −28 -26 -16 | Hippocampus/parahippocampal gyrus* | |
| 0.03 | 73 | 4.25 | −28 -26 -16 | Hippocampus/parahippocampal gyrus* | |
| 0.02 | 119 | 4.65 | −30 -26 -16 | Hippocampus/parahippocampal gyrus* | |
| 0.02 | 106 | 4.85 | −30 -26 -16 | Hippocampus/parahippocampal gyrus* | |
IQ and gender entered as covariates into the analysis. Analysis thresholded at p = 0.001 uncorrected.* = small volume correction for MTL applied. KE = cluster size in voxels.
Figure 3Between group activation differences (Colour scale red-yellow indicates T score, range 2.5-4).
Figure 4Between group activation differences for PHG/hippocampal cluster (error bars ± 1 SE).