Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38419904›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2024

Complex executive functions assessed by the trail making test (TMT) part B improve more than those assessed by the TMT part A or digit span backward task during vagus nerve stimulation in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy.

Niina Lähde, Pabitra Basnyat, Jani Raitanen, Leena Kämppi, Kai Lehtimäki, Eija Rosti-Otajärvi, Jukka Peltola

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Niina LähdeDepartment of Neurology, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland.
Pabitra BasnyatFaculty of Medicine and Health Technology, Tampere University, Tampere, Finland.
Jani RaitanenFaculty of Social Sciences, Health Sciences, Tampere University, Tampere, Finland.
Leena KämppiEpilepsia Helsinki, Member of EpiCARE ERN, Department of Neurology, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Kai LehtimäkiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland.
Eija Rosti-OtajärviDepartment of Neurology, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland.
Jukka PeltolaDepartment of Neurology, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland.
Tampere University · FITampere University · FITampere University Hospital · FIUniversity of Helsinki · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: There is a paucity of clinical studies examining the long-term effects of vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) on cognition, although a recent study of patients with drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) treated with VNS therapy demonstrated significant improvement in executive functions as measured by the EpiTrack composite score. The present study aimed to investigate performance variability in three cognitive tests assessing executive functions and working memory in a cohort of DRE patients receiving VNS therapy during a follow-up duration of up to 5 years. Methods: The study included 46 DRE patients who were assessed with the Trail Making Test (TMT) (Parts A and B) and Digit Span Backward (DB) task prior to VNS implantation, 6 months and 12 months after implantation, and yearly thereafter as a part of the clinical VNS protocol. A linear mixed-effects (LME) model was used to analyze changes in test z scores over time, accounting for variations in follow-up duration when predicting changes over 5 years. Additionally, we conducted descriptive analyses to illustrate individual changes. Results: On average, TMT-A z scores improved by 0.024 units (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.006 to 0.042, Conclusion: Performance in all three tests improved at the group level during the follow-up period, with the most robust improvement observed in TMT-B, which requires inhibition control and set-switching in addition to the visuoperceptual processing speed that is crucial in TMT-A and working-memory performance that is essential in DB. Moreover, the improvement in TMT-B was further enhanced if the patient had psychiatric comorbidities.

Indexed as

attention and executive functionsdigit span backwarddrug-resistant epilepsyprocessing speedset-switchingtrail-making testvagus nerve stimulationworking memory

Identifiers

PMID38419904
PMCPMC10899669
OpenAlexW4391818351

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.