Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33522563›Full record

SynthesisArchives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists2021

Electroencephalography, Magnetoencephalography, and Cognitive Reserve: A Systematic Review.

Sebastián A Balart-Sánchez, Mayra Bittencourt-Villalpando, Joukje van der Naalt, Natasha M Maurits

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Electroencephalography, Magnetoencephalography, and Cognitive Reserve: A Systematic Review.Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

4 authors.

Sebastián A Balart-SánchezDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, 9700 RB, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4967-7739
Mayra Bittencourt-VillalpandoDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, 9700 RB, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5248-9272
Joukje van der NaaltDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, 9700 RB, Netherlands.
Natasha M MauritsDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, 9700 RB, Netherlands.

Funding

National Council of Science and Technology of Mexico 709126
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveCognitive reserve (CR) is the capacity to adapt to (future) brain damage without any or only minimal clinical symptoms. The underlying neuroplastic mechanisms remain unclear. Electrocorticography (ECOG), electroencephalography (EEG), and magnetoencephalography (MEG) may help elucidate the brain mechanisms underlying CR, as CR is thought to be related to efficient utilization of remaining brain resources. The purpose of this systematic review is to collect, evaluate, and synthesize the findings on neural correlates of CR estimates using ECOG, EEG, and MEG.

methodWe examined articles that were published from the first standardized definition of CR. Eleven EEG and five MEG cross-sectional studies met the inclusion criteria: They concerned original research, analyzed (M)EEG in humans, used a validated CR estimate, and related (M)EEG to CR. Quality assessment was conducted using an adapted form of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. No ECOG study met the inclusion criteria.

resultsA total of 1383 participants from heterogeneous patient, young and older healthy groups were divided into three categories by (M)EEG methodology: Eight (M)EEG studies employed event-related fields or potentials, six studies analyzed brain oscillations at rest (of which one also analyzed a cognitive task), and three studies analyzed brain connectivity. Various CR estimates were employed and all studies compared different (M)EEG measures and CR estimates. Several associations between (M)EEG measures and CR estimates were observed.

conclusionOur findings support that (M)EEG measures are related to CR estimates, particularly in healthy individuals. However, the character of this relationship is dependent on the population and task studied, warranting further studies.

Indexed as

Cognitive ReserveMagnetoencephalographyBrainBrain MappingCross-Sectional StudiesElectroencephalographyHumansNeuropsychological TestsBrain oscillationsCognitive reserveElectroencephalographyEvent-related potentialshealthy individualsMagnetoencephalographyP3patients

Identifiers

PMID33522563
PMCPMC8517624

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.