ArticleCurrent Alzheimer research2025
Effects of Cognitive Demand and Imaginability on Semantic Cognition in Patients with Primary Progressive Aphasia.
Article in Current Alzheimer research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION/
objectivePrimary progressive aphasia (PPA) is a clinical syndrome characterized by progressive language impairment. Three subtypes have been identified: semantic (svPPA), nonfluent (nfPPA), and logopenic (lvPPA). Although clinical criteria exist to classify these subtypes, the specific ways in which semantic cognition is impaired across these variants have not yet been fully elucidated. This cross-sectional study aimed to analyze the effects of cognitive demand and imaginability on semantic cognition in patients with PPA.
methodsFifteen patients with PPA (five per variant) and 20 healthy controls completed a semantic association task comprising 20 items. The task included two levels of cognitive demand (low and high) and two types of concepts (concrete and abstract). Participants selected the word with the strongest semantic link to a probe word, based on synonymy, categorical relations, or shared features. Accuracy and reaction times were recorded and analyzed using nonparametric statistics.
resultsAll PPA groups performed significantly worse than controls, showing fewer correct responses and longer reaction times. svPPA patients exhibited the greatest impairment across all conditions. nfPPA patients performed similarly to controls with concrete concepts but showed deficits with abstract words. lvPPA patients experienced greater difficulty under high cognitive demand, particularly with abstract words, indicating impaired semantic control. DISCUSSION: These findings suggest that svPPA is characterized by global impairment of conceptual knowledge, whereas nfPPA and lvPPA exhibit more selective deficits depending on concept type and cognitive demand.
conclusionThe research herein highlights the importance of considering cognitive demand and imaginability when assessing semantic cognition in PPA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40965072What 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.