Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35368257›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2022

tDCS-Induced Memory Reconsolidation Effects: Analysis of Prominent Predicting Factors.

Maria Cotelli, Clarissa Ferrari, Elena Gobbi, Giuliano Binetti, Rosa Manenti, Marco Sandrini

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 44% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Maria CotelliNeuropsychology Unit, IRCCS Istituto Centro San Giovanni di Dio Fatebenefratelli, Brescia, Italy.
Clarissa FerrariStatistics Service, IRCCS Istituto Centro San Giovanni di Dio Fatebenefratelli, Brescia, Italy.
Elena GobbiNeuropsychology Unit, IRCCS Istituto Centro San Giovanni di Dio Fatebenefratelli, Brescia, Italy.
Giuliano BinettiMAC Memory Clinic and Molecular Markers Laboratory, IRCCS Istituto Centro San Giovanni di Dio Fatebenefratelli, Brescia, Italy.
Rosa ManentiNeuropsychology Unit, IRCCS Istituto Centro San Giovanni di Dio Fatebenefratelli, Brescia, Italy.
Marco SandriniSchool of Psychology, University of Roehampton, London, United Kingdom.
Centro San Giovanni di Dio Fatebenefratelli · ITUniversity of Roehampton · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Memory impairment is among one of the greatest cognitive complaints in midlife and in old age. Considering the importance of good memory functioning in everyday life, it is crucial to study interventions that can reduce the natural decline in this cognitive function. Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) studies have demonstrated that the lateral prefrontal cortex (PFC) plays a causal role in enhancing episodic memory recall through reconsolidation. Using a similar paradigm with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the left lateral PFC, facilitation effects were observed in delayed memory retrieval in older adults with subjective memory complaints (SMCs) and amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment (aMCI). However, it remains unclear which potential factors (i.e., tDCS group, cognitive reserve, education level, diagnosis and encoding performance) directly and/or indirectly modulate the tDCS-induced memory reconsolidation effects. Methods: We reanalyzed data acquired in our previous tDCS studies with 22 SMC and 18 aMCI participants from the perspective of predicting delayed memory retrieval performance. These studies included a learning session on Day 1, a reactivation by a contextual reminder followed by 15 min of tDCS session on Day 2 (24 h after Day 1), and two retrieval sessions (free recall and recognition) tested on Days 3 and 30 (48 h and 30 Days after Day 1). Results: Univariate models showed that tDCS group (sham vs. active) significantly predicted memory recognition (but not free recall), evidenced by higher scores in the active tDCS group than in sham group, confirming our previous results. Encoding performance and diagnosis (SMC vs. aMCI) significantly predicted memory retrieval, suggesting higher performances in individuals with SMC than in those with aMCI. Regarding cognitive reserve, higher leisure time activity subscores significantly predicted better memory recognition. Finally, multiple models did not show any tDCS group × predictor interaction effects, indicating that the effects of the predictors on retrieval occurred irrespective of tDCS group. Conclusion: Our results shed light on predicting factors of episodic memory retrieval in this reconsolidation paradigm in individuals with SMC and aMCI. The findings suggest that multifactorial interventions program may be most promising to slow cognitive decline and delay the onset of dementia.

Indexed as

cognitive reservehealthy older adultsmemorymild cognitive impairmentsubjective memory complaints

Identifiers

PMID35368257
PMCPMC8969754
OpenAlexW4220775947

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.