Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25875001›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Changes in brain network efficiency and working memory performance in aging.

Matthew L Stanley, Sean L Simpson, Dale Dagenbach, Robert G Lyday, Jonathan H Burdette, Paul J Laurienti

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 74 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
74citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

74 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Developmental changes in brain-wide fear memory networks.Neurobiology of learning and memory · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

14 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

Matthew L StanleyLaboratory for Complex Brain Networks, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, United States of America.
Sean L SimpsonLaboratory for Complex Brain Networks, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, United States of America; Department of Biostatistical Sciences, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, United States of America.
Dale DagenbachLaboratory for Complex Brain Networks, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, United States of America; Department of Psychology, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, United States of America.
Robert G LydayLaboratory for Complex Brain Networks, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, United States of America.
Jonathan H BurdetteLaboratory for Complex Brain Networks, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, United States of America; Department of Radiology, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, United States of America.
Paul J LaurientiLaboratory for Complex Brain Networks, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, United States of America; Department of Radiology, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, United States of America.

Funding

Wake Forest Claude D. Pepper OAIC - RenewalP30AG021332 · NIA · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI STEPHEN B. KRITCHEVSKY · 2002 to 2026
$36.4M
Statistical Methods for Whole-Brain Connectivety NetworksK25EB012236 · NIBIB · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI SIMPSON, SEAN L · 2012 to 2016
$796k
NIA NIH HHS P30 AG021332NIBIB NIH HHS K25 EB012236NIBIB NIH HHS K25 EB012236-01A1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Working memory is a complex psychological construct referring to the temporary storage and active processing of information. We used functional connectivity brain network metrics quantifying local and global efficiency of information transfer for predicting individual variability in working memory performance on an n-back task in both young (n = 14) and older (n = 15) adults. Individual differences in both local and global efficiency during the working memory task were significant predictors of working memory performance in addition to age (and an interaction between age and global efficiency). Decreases in local efficiency during the working memory task were associated with better working memory performance in both age cohorts. In contrast, increases in global efficiency were associated with much better working performance for young participants; however, increases in global efficiency were associated with a slight decrease in working memory performance for older participants. Individual differences in local and global efficiency during resting-state sessions were not significant predictors of working memory performance. Significant group whole-brain functional network decreases in local efficiency also were observed during the working memory task compared to rest, whereas no significant differences were observed in network global efficiency. These results are discussed in relation to recently developed models of age-related differences in working memory.

Indexed as

AgingMemory, Short-TermAdultAgedBrainBrain MappingCognitionCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleNeural PathwaysNeuropsychological TestsRegression AnalysisYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID25875001
PMCPMC4395305

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.