Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33987536›Full record

ArticleBrain communications2021

Memory precision of object-location binding is unimpaired in

Helena M Gellersen, Gillian Coughlan, Michael Hornberger, Jon S Simons

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain communications, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Helena M GellersenDepartment of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 3EB, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7544-2311
Gillian CoughlanRotman Research Institute, Baycrest Hospital, Toronto, ON M6A 1W1, Canada.
Michael HornbergerNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7QU, UK.
Jon S SimonsDepartment of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 3EB, UK.
University of Cambridge · GBBaycrest Hospital · CAUniversity of East Anglia · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Research suggests that tests of memory fidelity, feature binding and spatial navigation are promising for early detection of subtle behavioural changes related to Alzheimer's disease. In the absence of longitudinal data, one way of testing the early detection potential of cognitive tasks is through the comparison of individuals at different genetic risk for Alzheimer's dementia. Most studies have done so using samples aged 70 years or older. Here, we tested whether memory fidelity of long-term object-location binding may be a sensitive marker even among cognitively healthy individuals in their mid-60s by comparing participants at low and higher risk based on presence of the ε4-allele of the apolipoprotein gene (

Indexed as

Alzheimer’s diseaseAPOEearly detectionmemoryspatial navigation

Identifiers

PMID33987536
PMCPMC8108563
OpenAlexW3160460724

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.