Erica L Schmidt1, Wesley Burge2, Kristina M Visscher1, Lesley A Ross3. 1. Department of Psychology, The University of Alabama at Birmingham. 2. Department of Neurobiology, The University of Alabama at Birmingham. 3. Department of Human Development and Family Studies, The Pennsylvania State University.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study examined the relationship between cortical thickness in executive control networks and neuropsychological measures of executive function. METHOD: Forty-one community-dwelling older adults completed an MRI scan and a neuropsychological battery including 5 measures of executive function. RESULTS: Factor analysis of executive function measures revealed 2 distinct factors: (a) Complex Attention Control (CAC), comprised of tasks that required immediate response to stimuli and involved subtle performance feedback; and (b) Sustained Executive Control (SEC), comprised of tasks that involved maintenance and manipulation of information over time. Neural networks of interest were the frontoparietal network (F-P) and cingulo-opercular network (C-O), which have previously been hypothesized to relate to different components of executive function, based on functional MRI studies, but not neuropsychological factors. Linear regression models revealed that greater cortical thickness in the F-P network, but not the C-O network, predicted better performance on the CAC factor, whereas greater cortical thickness in the C-O network, but not the F-P network, predicted better performance on the SEC factor. CONCLUSIONS: The relationship between cortical thickness and performance on executive function measures was characterized by a double dissociation between the thickness of cortical regions hypothesized to be involved in executive control and distinct executive processes. Results indicate that fundamentally different executive processes may be predicted by cortical thickness in distinct brain networks. (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved).
OBJECTIVE: This study examined the relationship between cortical thickness in executive control networks and neuropsychological measures of executive function. METHOD: Forty-one community-dwelling older adults completed an MRI scan and a neuropsychological battery including 5 measures of executive function. RESULTS: Factor analysis of executive function measures revealed 2 distinct factors: (a) Complex Attention Control (CAC), comprised of tasks that required immediate response to stimuli and involved subtle performance feedback; and (b) Sustained Executive Control (SEC), comprised of tasks that involved maintenance and manipulation of information over time. Neural networks of interest were the frontoparietal network (F-P) and cingulo-opercular network (C-O), which have previously been hypothesized to relate to different components of executive function, based on functional MRI studies, but not neuropsychological factors. Linear regression models revealed that greater cortical thickness in the F-P network, but not the C-O network, predicted better performance on the CAC factor, whereas greater cortical thickness in the C-O network, but not the F-P network, predicted better performance on the SEC factor. CONCLUSIONS: The relationship between cortical thickness and performance on executive function measures was characterized by a double dissociation between the thickness of cortical regions hypothesized to be involved in executive control and distinct executive processes. Results indicate that fundamentally different executive processes may be predicted by cortical thickness in distinct brain networks. (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved).
Authors: J B Jobe; D M Smith; K Ball; S L Tennstedt; M Marsiske; S L Willis; G W Rebok; J N Morris; K F Helmers; M D Leveck; K Kleinman Journal: Control Clin Trials Date: 2001-08
Authors: Sandra Bell-McGinty; Kenneth Podell; Michael Franzen; Anne D Baird; Michael J Williams Journal: Int J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 3.485
Authors: William W Seeley; Vinod Menon; Alan F Schatzberg; Jennifer Keller; Gary H Glover; Heather Kenna; Allan L Reiss; Michael D Greicius Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2007-02-28 Impact factor: 6.167
Authors: Jet M J Vonk; Batool Rizvi; Patrick J Lao; Mariana Budge; Jennifer J Manly; Richard Mayeux; Adam M Brickman Journal: Cereb Cortex Date: 2019-06-01 Impact factor: 5.357
Authors: Cheshire Hardcastle; Hanna K Hausman; Jessica N Kraft; Alejandro Albizu; Nicole D Evangelista; Emanuel M Boutzoukas; Andrew O'Shea; Kailey Langer; Emily Van Van Etten; Pradyumna K Bharadwaj; Hyun Song; Samantha G Smith; Eric Porges; Steven T DeKosky; Georg A Hishaw; Samuel S Wu; Michael Marsiske; Ronald Cohen; Gene E Alexander; Adam J Woods Journal: Geroscience Date: 2021-08-25 Impact factor: 7.713
Authors: Marcos E Domínguez-Arriola; Víctor E Olalde-Mathieu; Eduardo A Garza-Villarreal; Fernando A Barrios Journal: Brain Topogr Date: 2022-08-21 Impact factor: 4.275
Authors: Jessica N Kraft; Alejandro Albizu; Andrew O'Shea; Hanna K Hausman; Nicole D Evangelista; Emanuel Boutzoukas; Cheshire Hardcastle; Emily J Van Etten; Pradyumna K Bharadwaj; Hyun Song; Samantha G Smith; Steven DeKosky; Georg A Hishaw; Samuel Wu; Michael Marsiske; Ronald Cohen; Gene E Alexander; Eric Porges; Adam J Woods Journal: Cereb Cortex Date: 2022-04-20 Impact factor: 4.861
Authors: Davor N Zink; Justin B Miller; Jessica Z K Caldwell; Christopher Bird; Sarah J Banks Journal: J Clin Exp Neuropsychol Date: 2017-11-07 Impact factor: 2.475
Authors: R Righart; P Schmidt; R Dahnke; V Biberacher; A Beer; D Buck; B Hemmer; J S Kirschke; C Zimmer; C Gaser; M Mühlau Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-07-06 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Mariya V Cherkasova; Nazlie Faridi; Kevin F Casey; Kevin Larcher; Gillian A O'Driscoll; Lily Hechtman; Ridha Joober; Glen B Baker; Jennifer Palmer; Alan C Evans; Alain Dagher; Chawki Benkelfat; Marco Leyton Journal: Front Hum Neurosci Date: 2017-08-22 Impact factor: 3.169