ArticleJournal of neurology2022
Limbic covariance network alterations in patients with transient global amnesia.
Article in Journal of neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evidence of Small Vessel Disease in Patients with Transient Global Amnesia Based on the Peak Width of Skeletonized Mean Diffusivity.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2025Article
- Brain morphometry in transient global amnesia: a triangulated analysis approach.Dementia & neuropsychologia · 2024Article
- Mammillary Body Atrophy in Temporal Lobe Epilepsy With Hippocampal Sclerosis.Journal of clinical neurology (Seoul, Korea) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe compared limbic structure volumes and graph theory parameters of the limbic covariance network between patients with transient global amnesia (TGA) and healthy controls, and between patients with single and recurrent TGA events.
methodsWe retrospectively enrolled 122 patients with TGA (single event, n = 107; recurrent events, n = 15) and 50 healthy controls who underwent three-dimensional T1-weighted MRI imaging of the brain. Volumetric analysis of the subcortical limbic structures, including the hippocampus, amygdala, thalamus, mammillary body, hypothalamus, basal forebrain, septal nuclei, fornix, and nucleus accumbens, was performed. We examined the limbic covariance network using a graph theory.
resultsLimbic structure volumes did not differ between patients with TGA and healthy controls, and between patients with a single event and those with recurrent events. However, the radius of the limbic covariance network was significantly greater in patients with TGA than in healthy controls (6.595 vs. 4.564, p = 0.040). Furthermore, the radius, diameter, eccentricity, and characteristics path length were greater (4.066 vs. 2.000, p = 0.009; 7.062 vs. 3.645, p = 0.029; 5.633 vs. 2.774, p = 0.013; 3.373 vs. 1.688, p = 0.004; respectively), whereas the average strength, global efficiency, local efficiency, mean clustering coefficient, transitivity, and small-worldness index were lower (5.595 vs. 10.831, p = 0.004; 0.350 vs. 0.642, p = 0.002; 0.531 vs. 1.724, p = 0.004; 0.304 vs. 0.624, p = 0.006; 0.456 vs. 0.935, p = 0.003; 0.913 vs. 0.993, p = 0.017; respectively), in patients with recurrent events than in those with a single event.
conclusionThe limbic covariance network shows significant alterations in patients with TGA, as well as differences between patients with recurrent events and those with a single event. These findings suggest that changes in the limbic covariance network could be related to the pathogenesis of TGA.
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.