Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38034504›Full record

ReviewPostepy psychiatrii neurologii2023

Time of day and chronotype in the assessment of cognitive functions.

Monika Wiłkość-Dębczyńska, Magdalena Liberacka-Dwojak

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Postepy psychiatrii neurologii, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

2 authors.

Monika Wiłkość-DębczyńskaInstitute of Psychology, Kazimierz Wielki University, Bydgoszcz, Poland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0094-7793
Magdalena Liberacka-DwojakInstitute of Psychology, Kazimierz Wielki University, Bydgoszcz, Poland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8092-4219

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Circadian rhythms are synchronized, through the endogenous biological clock, with the 24-hour cycle, and associated with numerous changes in human functioning, both in physical and mental aspects. It is assumed that daily fluctuations in cognitive performance are a consequence of interacting homeostatic and circadian processes regulating an individual's sleep-wake rhythms. A chronotype may be understood as a phenotype of circadian cycles determined by an endogenous biological clock. Despite research findings showing a significant relationship between those factors and cognition, they remain insufficiently considered in the domain of cognitive psychology and neuropsychology. Views: This narrative review aims to describe and highlight the interactions between the time of day, chronotype, and cognitive performance in domains of mental activity variables, receptive functions, memory and learning, expressive functions, and thinking. Conclusions: The results of the research show that time-of-day effects on basic and more complex cognitive functions depend on an individual's chronotype with a dominant effect of synchrony between chronotype and time of cognitive testing, with large differences in circadian cycles between younger and older age groups. It is suggested that chronotype assessment and time of day control should be included as important variables in the diagnosis of cognitive function in both healthy and clinical populations. There is also an emerging need for further investigations to better understand how chronotype and circadian rhythms modulate human brain physiology and cognition.

Indexed as

chronotypecognitiontime of day

Identifiers

PMID38034504
PMCPMC10683050

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.