Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24963641›Full record

ArticleJournal of the International Neuropsychological Society : JINS2014

Merging clinical neuropsychology and functional neuroimaging to evaluate the construct validity and neural network engagement of the n-back task.

Tonisha E Kearney-Ramos, Jennifer S Fausett, Jennifer L Gess, Ashley Reno, Jennifer Peraza, Clint D Kilts, G Andrew James

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society : JINS, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Tonisha E Kearney-Ramos1Psychiatric Research Institute,University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences,Little Rock,Arkansas.
Jennifer S Fausett1Psychiatric Research Institute,University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences,Little Rock,Arkansas.
Jennifer L Gess1Psychiatric Research Institute,University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences,Little Rock,Arkansas.
Ashley Reno2University of Virginia School of Medicine,Charlottesville,Virginia.
Jennifer Peraza3New Mexico VA Health Care System,Albuquerque,New Mexico.
Clint D Kilts1Psychiatric Research Institute,University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences,Little Rock,Arkansas.
G Andrew James1Psychiatric Research Institute,University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences,Little Rock,Arkansas.

Funding

Arkansas Center for Clinical and Translational ResearchUL1TR000039 · NCATS · UNIV OF ARKANSAS FOR MED SCIS · PI BECK, CORNELIA MARIE, JAMES, LAURA P · 2012 to 2014
$10.0M
Translational Training in AddictionT32DA022981 · NIDA · UNIV OF ARKANSAS FOR MED SCIS · PI Melissa Jean Zielinski · 2009 to 2026
$6.1M
The University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Initiative for Maximizing Student Development ProgramR25GM083247 · NIGMS · UNIV OF ARKANSAS FOR MED SCIS · PI MCGEHEE, ROBERT E, THOMAS, BILLY R · 2009 to 2023
$5.4M
Arkansas Center for Clinical Translational ResearchKL2TR000063 · NCATS · UNIV OF ARKANSAS FOR MED SCIS · PI BECK, CORNELIA MARIE, JAMES, LAURA P · 2012 to 2014
$459k
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR000063NCATS NIH HHS KL2TR000063NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000039NCATS NIH HHS UL1TR000039NIDA NIH HHS T32 DA022981NIDA NIH HHS T32DA022981NIGMS NIH HHS R25 GM083247NIGMS NIH HHS R25GM083247
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The n-back task is a widely used neuroimaging paradigm for studying the neural basis of working memory (WM); however, its neuropsychometric properties have received little empirical investigation. The present study merged clinical neuropsychology and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to explore the construct validity of the letter variant of the n-back task (LNB) and to further identify the task-evoked networks involved in WM. Construct validity of the LNB task was investigated using a bootstrapping approach to correlate LNB task performance across clinically validated neuropsychological measures of WM to establish convergent validity, as well as measures of related but distinct cognitive constructs (i.e., attention and short-term memory) to establish discriminant validity. Independent component analysis (ICA) identified brain networks active during the LNB task in 34 healthy control participants, and general linear modeling determined task-relatedness of these networks. Bootstrap correlation analyses revealed moderate to high correlations among measures expected to converge with LNB (|ρ|≥ 0.37) and weak correlations among measures expected to discriminate (|ρ|≤ 0.29), controlling for age and education. ICA identified 35 independent networks, 17 of which demonstrated engagement significantly related to task condition, controlling for reaction time variability. Of these, the bilateral frontoparietal networks, bilateral dorsolateral prefrontal cortices, bilateral superior parietal lobules including precuneus, and frontoinsular network were preferentially recruited by the 2-back condition compared to 0-back control condition, indicating WM involvement. These results support the use of the LNB as a measure of WM and confirm its use in probing the network-level neural correlates of WM processing.

Indexed as

Brain MappingMagnetic Resonance ImagingNeuropsychological TestsAdolescentAdultBrainCognitionFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedLinear ModelsMaleMiddle AgedOxygenYoung AdultOxygen

Identifiers

PMID24963641
PMCPMC4290162

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.