Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30459639›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in physiology2018

Plasticity in the Sensitivity to Light in Aging: Decreased Non-visual Impact of Light on Cognitive Brain Activity in Older Individuals but No Impact of Lens Replacement.

Véronique Daneault, Marie Dumont, Éric Massé, Pierre Forcier, Arnaud Boré, Jean-Marc Lina, Julien Doyon, Gilles Vandewalle, Julie Carrier

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Luxotonic signals in human prefrontal cortex as a possible substrate for effects of light on mood and cognition.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Véronique DaneaultFunctional Neuroimaging Unit, University of Montreal Geriatric Institute, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Marie DumontCenter for Advanced Research in Sleep Medicine, CIUSSS-NÎM - Hôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Éric MasséFunctional Neuroimaging Unit, University of Montreal Geriatric Institute, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Pierre ForcierÉcole d'Optométrie, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Arnaud BoréFunctional Neuroimaging Unit, University of Montreal Geriatric Institute, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Jean-Marc LinaCenter for Advanced Research in Sleep Medicine, CIUSSS-NÎM - Hôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Julien DoyonFunctional Neuroimaging Unit, University of Montreal Geriatric Institute, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Gilles VandewalleGIGA-Institute, Cyclotron Research Centre-In Vivo Imaging, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.
Julie CarrierFunctional Neuroimaging Unit, University of Montreal Geriatric Institute, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Université de Montréal · CAHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal · CACanadian Sleep & Circadian Network · CAUniversity of Liège · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Beyond its essential visual role, light, and particularly blue light, has numerous non-visual effects, including stimulating cognitive functions and alertness. Non-visual effects of light may decrease with aging and contribute to cognitive and sleepiness complaints in aging. However, both the brain and the eye profoundly change in aging. Whether the stimulating effects light on cognitive brain functions varies in aging and how ocular changes may be involved is not established. We compared the impact of blue and orange lights on non-visual cognitive brain activity in younger (23.6 ± 2.5 years), and older individuals with their natural lenses (NL; 66.7 ± 5.1 years) or with intraocular lens (IOL) replacement following cataract surgery (69.6 ± 4.9 years). Analyses reveal that blue light modulates executive brain responses in both young and older individuals. Light effects were, however, stronger in young individuals including in the hippocampus and frontal and cingular cortices. Light effects did not significantly differ between older-IOL and older-NL while regression analyses indicated that differential brain engagement was not underlying age-related differences in light effects. These findings show that, although its impact decreases, light can stimulate cognitive brain activity in aging. Since lens replacement did not affect light impact, the brain seems to adapt to the progressive decrease in retinal light exposure in aging.

Indexed as

agingcircadiancognitionlenslightmelanopsinnon-visual impact of light

Identifiers

PMID30459639
PMCPMC6232421
OpenAlexW2900343071

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.