Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28827088›Full record

ReviewNeuroscience2018

Comparing and Contrasting the Cognitive Effects of Hippocampal and Ventromedial Prefrontal Cortex Damage: A Review of Human Lesion Studies.

Cornelia McCormick, Elisa Ciaramelli, Flavia De Luca, Eleanor A Maguire

Abstract readComparative StudyReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neuroscience, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

62 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Common and distinct correlates of construction and elaboration of episodic-autobiographical memory: An ALE meta-analysis.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2023
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Cornelia McCormickWellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, Institute of Neurology, University College London, 12 Queen Square, London WC1N 3BG, UK.
Elisa CiaramelliDipartimento di Psicologia, Università di Bologna, Bologna, Italy; Centro studi e ricerche di Neuroscienze Cognitive, Cesena, Italy.
Flavia De LucaDipartimento di Psicologia, Università di Bologna, Bologna, Italy; Centro studi e ricerche di Neuroscienze Cognitive, Cesena, Italy.
Eleanor A MaguireWellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, Institute of Neurology, University College London, 12 Queen Square, London WC1N 3BG, UK. Electronic address: e.maguire@ucl.ac.uk.

Funding

Medical Research Council G0300117Medical Research Council G1002276Wellcome Trust 101759/Z/13/ZWellcome Trust 203147/Z/16/ZWellcome Trust 210567/Z/18/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The hippocampus and ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) are closely connected brain regions whose functions are still debated. In order to offer a fresh perspective on understanding the contributions of these two brain regions to cognition, in this review we considered cognitive tasks that usually elicit deficits in hippocampal-damaged patients (e.g., autobiographical memory retrieval), and examined the performance of vmPFC-lesioned patients on these tasks. We then took cognitive tasks where performance is typically compromised following vmPFC damage (e.g., decision making), and looked at how these are affected by hippocampal lesions. Three salient motifs emerged. First, there are surprising gaps in our knowledge about how hippocampal and vmPFC patients perform on tasks typically associated with the other group. Second, while hippocampal or vmPFC damage seems to adversely affect performance on so-called hippocampal tasks, the performance of hippocampal and vmPFC patients clearly diverges on classic vmPFC tasks. Third, although performance appears analogous on hippocampal tasks, on closer inspection, there are significant disparities between hippocampal and vmPFC patients. Based on these findings, we suggest a tentative hierarchical model to explain the functions of the hippocampus and vmPFC. We propose that the vmPFC initiates the construction of mental scenes by coordinating the curation of relevant elements from neocortical areas, which are then funneled into the hippocampus to build a scene. The vmPFC then engages in iterative re-initiation via feedback loops with neocortex and hippocampus to facilitate the flow and integration of the multiple scenes that comprise the coherent unfolding of an extended mental event.

Indexed as

Cognition DisordersHippocampusHumansPrefrontal Cortexamnesiaautobiographical memorydecision makinghippocampusscene constructionvmPFC

Identifiers

PMID28827088
PMCPMC6053620

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.