Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26708084›Full record

ArticleJournal of the International Neuropsychological Society : JINS2016

The Allure of High-Risk Rewards in Huntington's disease.

Nelleke C van Wouwe, Kristen E Kanoff, Daniel O Claassen, K Richard Ridderinkhof, Peter Hedera, Madaline B Harrison, Scott A Wylie

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society : JINS, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 50% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Disordered Decision Making: A Cognitive Framework for Apathy and Impulsivity in Huntington's Disease.Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society · 2022
    Review
  6. Aberrant Striatal Value Representation in Huntington's Disease Gene Carriers 25 Years Before Onset.Biological psychiatry. Cognitive neuroscience and neuroimaging · 2021
    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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Nelleke C van Wouwe1Department of Neurology,Vanderbilt University Medical Center,Tennessee.
Kristen E Kanoff1Department of Neurology,Vanderbilt University Medical Center,Tennessee.
Daniel O Claassen1Department of Neurology,Vanderbilt University Medical Center,Tennessee.
K Richard Ridderinkhof2Department of Psychology,University of Amsterdam,the Netherlands.
Peter Hedera1Department of Neurology,Vanderbilt University Medical Center,Tennessee.
Madaline B Harrison4Department of Neurology,University of Virginia,Virginia.
Scott A Wylie1Department of Neurology,Vanderbilt University Medical Center,Tennessee.
Vanderbilt University Medical Center · USUniversity of Amsterdam · NLUniversity of Virginia · US

Funding

Dopamine Effects on Mesocorticolimbic Function in Parkinson DiseaseK23NS080988 · NINDS · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI CLAASSEN, DANIEL OLIVER · 2013 to 2017
$904k
Neurocognitive Mechanisms of Inhibition Deficits in Parkinson's DiseaseK23AG028750 · NIA · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI WYLIE, SCOTT A · 2009 to 2013
$791k
NIA NIH HHS K23 AG028750NIA NIH HHS K23AG028750NINDS NIH HHS K23 NS080988NINDS NIH HHS K23NS080988
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesHuntington's disease (HD) is a neurodegenerative disorder that produces a bias toward risky, reward-driven decisions in situations where the outcomes of decisions are uncertain and must be discovered. However, it is unclear whether HD patients show similar biases in decision-making when learning demands are minimized and prospective risks and outcomes are known explicitly. We investigated how risk decision-making strategies and adjustments are altered in HD patients when reward contingencies are explicit.

methodsHD (N=18) and healthy control (HC; N=17) participants completed a risk-taking task in which they made a series of independent choices between a low-risk/low reward and high-risk/high reward risk options.

resultsComputational modeling showed that compared to HC, who showed a clear preference for low-risk compared to high-risk decisions, the HD group valued high-risks more than low-risk decisions, especially when high-risks were rewarded. The strategy analysis indicated that when high-risk options were rewarded, HC adopted a conservative risk strategy on the next trial by preferring the low-risk option (i.e., they counted their blessings and then played the surer bet). In contrast, following a rewarded high-risk choice, HD patients showed a clear preference for repeating the high-risk choice.

conclusionsThese results indicate a pattern of high-risk/high-reward decision bias in HD that persists when outcomes and risks are certain. The allure of high-risk/high-reward decisions in situations of risk certainty and uncertainty expands our insight into the dynamic decision-making deficits that create considerable clinical burden in HD.

Indexed as

RewardRisk-TakingAdultCognition DisordersDecision MakingFemaleHumansHuntington DiseaseMaleMiddle AgedNeuropsychological Testsbasal gangliacognitiondecision-makingexecutive testneurodegenerative diseasereward processing

Identifiers

PMID26708084
PMCPMC5381648
OpenAlexW2273806422

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.