ArticleScientific reports2024
Evaluating frontoparietal network topography for diagnostic markers of Alzheimer's disease.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Numerous prospective biomarkers are being studied for their ability to diagnose various stages of Alzheimer's disease (AD). High-density electroencephalogram (EEG) methods show promise as an accurate, economical, non-invasive approach to measuring the electrical potentials of brains associated with AD. Event-related potentials (ERPs) may serve as clinically useful biomarkers of AD. Through analysis of secondary data, the present study examined the performance and distribution of N4/P6 ERPs across the frontoparietal network (FPN) using EEG topographic mapping. ERP measures and memory as a function of reaction time (RT) were compared between a group of (n = 63) mild untreated AD patients and a control group of (n = 73) healthy age-matched adults. Based on the literature presented, it was expected that healthy controls would outperform patients in peak amplitude and mean component latency across three parameters of memory when measured at optimal N4 (frontal) and P6 (parietal) locations. It was also predicted that the control group would exhibit neural cohesion through FPN integration during cross-modal tasks, thus demonstrating healthy cognitive functioning consistent with older healthy adults. By targeting select frontal and parietal EEG reference channels based on N4/P6 component time windows and positivity, our findings demonstrated statistically significant group variations between controls and patients in N4/P6 peak amplitudes and latencies during cross-modal testing. Our results also support that the N4 ERP might be stronger than its P6 counterpart as a possible candidate biomarker. We conclude through topographic mapping that FPN integration occurs in healthy controls but is absent in AD patients during cross-modal memory tasks.
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.