ArticleBrain imaging and behavior2019
Hippocampal sulcal cavities: prevalence, risk factors and association with cognitive performance. The SMART-Medea study and PREDICT-MR study.
Article in Brain imaging and behavior, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Characterization of perivascular space pathology in a rat model of cerebral small vessel disease byJournal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2022Article
- Hippocampal sulcal cavities in healthy individual: high resolution magnetic resonance imaging using 3.0 MRI.International journal of clinical and experimental pathology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Hippocampal sulcal cavities (HSCs) are frequently observed on MRI, but their etiology and relevance is unclear. HSCs may be anatomical variations, or result from pathology. We assessed the presence of HSCs, and their cross-sectional association with demographics, vascular risk factors and cognitive functioning in two study samples. Within a random sample of 92 patients with vascular disease from the SMART-Medea study (mean age = 62, SD = 9 years) and 83 primary care patients from the PREDICT-MR study (mean age = 62, SD = 12 years) one rater manually scored HSCs at 1.5 T 3D T1-weighted coronal images blind to patient information. We estimated relative risks of age, sex and vascular risk factors with presence of HSCs using Poisson regression with log-link function and robust standard errors adjusted for age and sex. Using ANCOVA adjusted for age, sex, and education we estimated the association of the number of HSCs with memory, executive functioning, speed, and working memory. In the SMART-Medea study HSCs were present in 65% and in 52% in the PREDICT-MR study (χ
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.