ReviewBrain sciences2021
Subjective Time in Dementia: A Critical Review.
Review in Brain sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Subjective time perception in dementia: a behavioural and neuroanatomical analysis.Brain communications · 2026Article
- Tense production in French-speaking participants with Alzheimer's disease: What about discourse? Contribution of a storytelling-in-sequence task.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2025Article
- Exploring the Experiences of Times Without Care and Encounters in Persons With Dementia in the Swiss and German Nursing Home and Domiciliary Care Settings: Protocol for an Ethnographic Multimethods Study.JMIR research protocols · 2024Article
- Towards a neurodevelopmental cognitive perspective of temporal processing.Communications biology · 2024Review
- Informal carers' experiences in everyday life and the use of digital assistive technology for time management in persons with dementia or mild cognitive impairment.BMC geriatrics · 2024Article
- Multidimensional assessment of time perception along the continuum of Alzheimer's Disease and evidence of alterations in subjective cognitive decline.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Temporal processing deficit in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder: An online assessment.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The capacity for subjective time in humans encompasses the perception of time's unfolding from moment to moment, as well as the ability to traverse larger temporal expanses of past- and future-oriented thought via mental time travel. Disruption in time perception can result in maladaptive outcomes-from the innocuous lapse in timing that leads to a burnt piece of toast, to the grievous miscalculation that produces a traffic accident-while disruption to mental time travel can impact core functions from planning appointments to making long-term decisions. Mounting evidence suggests that disturbances to both time perception and mental time travel are prominent in dementia syndromes. Given that such disruptions can have severe consequences for independent functioning in everyday life, here we aim to provide a comprehensive exposition of subjective timing dysfunction in dementia, with a view to informing the management of such disturbances. We consider the neurocognitive mechanisms underpinning changes to both time perception and mental time travel across different dementia disorders. Moreover, we explicate the functional implications of altered subjective timing by reference to two key and representative adaptive capacities: prospective memory and intertemporal decision-making. Overall, our review sheds light on the transdiagnostic implications of subjective timing disturbances in dementia and highlights the high variability in performance across clinical syndromes and functional domains.
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.