ReviewNeuropsychology review2025
Memory Function and Huntington's Disease: A Systematic Review.
Review in Neuropsychology review, 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
This systematic review aimed to identify preserved and impaired memory processes in Huntington's disease (HD), with consideration of disease stage and the specific memory subsystems assessed. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar up to March 11, 2025. Eligible studies had to be peer-reviewed, had to involve participants aged 18 or older, had to include patients with genetically or clinically confirmed HD, and had to be published in English or French. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool. A structured narrative synthesis was performed across seven memory subsystems and clinical stages (pre-manifest vs. manifest), and findings were summarized using tables and figures. A total of 136 studies were included. Verbal episodic memory impairments were consistently observed from early stages, particularly in free recall, while recognition was initially preserved. Visual episodic memory showed progressive deficits. Olfactory memory, though rarely examined, appeared to be impaired early. Autobiographical memory was underinvestigated but showed signs of disruption, seemingly independent of executive dysfunction. Semantic memory was generally preserved but showed reduced access without cues. Early-stage impairments were also reported in working memory. Priming was preserved, while complex procedural learning tasks showed variable deficits. Many studies presented methodological limitations, including confounding and lack of blinding. Memory profiles in HD appear heterogeneous and subsystem-specific. Autobiographical memory may constitute a distinct cognitive marker. Improved characterization of memory deficits is crucial to guide the development of targeted cognitive interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41288948What 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.