Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36552195›Full record

ReviewBrain sciences2022

Cognition and Neuropsychological Changes at Altitude-A Systematic Review of Literature.

Kathrin Bliemsrieder, Elisabeth Margarete Weiss, Rainald Fischer, Hermann Brugger, Barbara Sperner-Unterweger, Katharina Hüfner

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Exercise performance reduction and preventive measures in highland sports.Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2023
    Article
  19. Review
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 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Kathrin BliemsriederUniversity Hospital of Psychiatry II, Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics and Medical Psychology, Innsbruck Medical University, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria.
Elisabeth Margarete WeissDepartment of Psychology, University of Innsbruck, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria.
Rainald FischerDepartment of Pneumology, Medizinische Klinik Innenstadt of the Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Ziemssenstr. 1, 80336 München, Germany.
Hermann BruggerInstitute of Mountain Emergency Medicine, Eurac Research, Via Ipazia 2, 39100 Bolzano, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-2752-6929
Barbara Sperner-UnterwegerUniversity Hospital of Psychiatry II, Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics and Medical Psychology, Innsbruck Medical University, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria.
Katharina HüfnerUniversity Hospital of Psychiatry II, Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics and Medical Psychology, Innsbruck Medical University, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-5453-8792
Innsbruck Medical University · ATEurac Research · ITLudwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DEUniversität Innsbruck · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

High-altitude (HA) exposure affects cognitive functions, but studies have found inconsistent results. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effects of HA exposure on cognitive functions in healthy subjects. A structural overview of the applied neuropsychological tests was provided with a classification of superordinate cognitive domains. A literature search was performed using PubMed up to October 2021 according to PRISMA guidelines. Eligibility criteria included a healthy human cohort exposed to altitude in the field (at minimum 2440 m [8000 ft]) or in a hypoxic environment in a laboratory, and an assessment of cognitive domains. The literature search identified 52 studies (29 of these were field studies; altitude range: 2440 m-8848 m [8000-29,029 ft]). Researchers applied 112 different neuropsychological tests. Attentional capacity, concentration, and executive functions were the most frequently studied. In the laboratory, the ratio of altitude-induced impairments (64.7%) was twice as high compared to results showing no change or improved results (35.3%), but altitudes studied were similar in the chamber compared to field studies. In the field, the opposite results were found (66.4 % no change or improvements, 33.6% impairments). Since better acclimatization can be assumed in the field studies, the findings support the hypothesis that sufficient acclimatization has beneficial effects on cognitive functions at HA. However, it also becomes apparent that research in this area would benefit most if a consensus could be reached on a standardized framework of freely available neurocognitive tests.

Indexed as

altitudecognitioncognitive domainshypoxianeuropsychological testsPRISMASTAR data reporting guidelines

Identifiers

PMID36552195
PMCPMC9775937
OpenAlexW4312078613

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.