Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38409536›Full record

ArticleJournal of neurology2024

Identifying and understanding cognitive profiles in multiple sclerosis: a role for visuospatial memory functioning.

Maureen van Dam, Eva A Krijnen, Ilse M Nauta, Tom A Fuchs, Brigit A de Jong, Martin Klein, Karin van der Hiele, Menno M Schoonheim, Hanneke E Hulst

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

9 authors.

Maureen van DamMS Center Amsterdam, Anatomy and Neurosciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Amsterdam UMC Location VUmc, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. m.vandam2@amsterdamumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4639-5138
Eva A KrijnenMS Center Amsterdam, Anatomy and Neurosciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Amsterdam UMC Location VUmc, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ilse M NautaMS Center Amsterdam, Neurology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Amsterdam UMC Location VUmc, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Tom A FuchsMS Center Amsterdam, Anatomy and Neurosciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Amsterdam UMC Location VUmc, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Brigit A de JongMS Center Amsterdam, Neurology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Amsterdam UMC Location VUmc, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Martin KleinMedical Psychology, Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Karin van der HieleInstitute of Psychology, Health, Medical and Neuropsychology Unit, Leiden University, Wassenaarseweg 52, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Menno M SchoonheimMS Center Amsterdam, Anatomy and Neurosciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Amsterdam UMC Location VUmc, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Hanneke E HulstInstitute of Psychology, Health, Medical and Neuropsychology Unit, Leiden University, Wassenaarseweg 52, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe heterogeneous nature of cognitive impairment in people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS) hampers understanding of the underlying mechanisms and developing patient-tailored interventions. We aim to identify and classify cognitive profiles in PwMS, comparing these to cognitive status (preserved versus impaired).

methodsWe included 1213 PwMS (72% female, age 45.4 ± 10.7 years, 83% relapsing-remitting MS). Cognitive test scores were converted to Z-scores compared to healthy controls for the functions: attention, inhibition, information processing speed (IPS), verbal fluency and verbal/visuospatial memory. Concerning cognitive status, impaired cognition (CI) was defined as performing at Z ≤ - 1.5 SD on ≥ 2 functions. Cognitive profiles were constructed using latent profile analysis on all cognitive functions. Cognitive profiles or status was classified using gradient boosting decision trees, providing the importance of each feature (demographics, clinical, cognitive and psychological functioning) for the overall classification.

resultsSix profiles were identified, showing variations in overall performance and specific deficits (attention, inhibition, IPS, verbal fluency, verbal memory and visuospatial memory). Across the profiles, IPS was the most impaired function (%CI most preserved profile, Profile 1 = 22.4%; %CI most impaired profile, Profile 6 = 76.6%). Cognitive impairment varied from 11.8% in Profile 1 to 95.3% in Profile 6. Of all cognitive functions, visuospatial memory was most important in classifying profiles and IPS the least (area under the curve (AUC) = 0.910). For cognitive status, IPS was the most important classifier (AUC = 0.997).

conclusionsThis study demonstrated that cognitive heterogeneity in MS reflects a continuum of cognitive severity, distinguishable by distinct cognitive profiles, primarily explained by variations in visuospatial memory functioning.

Indexed as

Cognitive DysfunctionMultiple SclerosisAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMultiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-RemittingNeuropsychological TestsSpatial MemoryClassificationCognitionLatent profile analysisMultiple sclerosisPhenotypesProfiles

Identifiers

PMID38409536
PMCPMC11055708

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.