ArticleJournal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD2023
Neurocognitive Operations Underlying Working Memory Abilities: An Analysis of Latency and Time-Based Parameters.
Article in Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Digital neuropsychological assessment-part 1: Defining mild cognitive impairment subtypes.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2026Article
- Digital neuropsychological assessment-Part 2: Relations with cardiovascular risk and informant ratings of neurocognitive decline, functional disabilities, and psychiatric symptoms.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2026Article
- Precision neurocognition: An emerging diagnostic paradigm leveraging digital cognitive assessment technology.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2025Review
- Dysexecutive difficulty and subtle everyday functional disabilities: the digital Trail Making Test.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- Children with developmental coordination disorders: a review of approaches to assessment and intervention.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Review
- Digital assessment of cognition in neurodegenerative disease: a data driven approach leveraging artificial intelligence.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe theory of executive attention (Fuster, 2015) suggests considerable plasticity regarding when specific neurocognitive operations are recruited to bring executive tasks to fruition.
objectiveWe tested the hypothesis that differing neurocognitive operations are recruited upon the initiation of a response, but that other distinct neurocognitive operations are recruited towards the middle or end of a response.
methodsThe Backward Digit Span Test (BDST) was administered to 58 memory clinic patients (MCI, n = 22; no-MCI, n = 36). Latency to generate all correct 5-span responses was obtained. Statistical analyses found that optimal group classification was achieved using the first and third digit backward. First and third response latencies were analyzed in relation to verbal working memory (WM), visual WM, processing speed, visuospatial operations, naming/lexical access, and verbal episodic memory tests.
resultsFor the first response, slower latencies were associated with better performance in relation to verbal WM and visuospatial test performance. For the third response, faster latencies were associated with better processing speed and visuospatial test performance.
conclusionConsistent with the theory of executive attention, these data show that the neurocognitive operations underlying successful executive test performance are not monolithic but can be quite nuanced with differing neurocognitive operations associated with specific time epochs. Results support the efficacy of obtaining time-based latency parameters to help disambiguate successful executive neurocognitive operations in memory clinic patients.
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.