首页 > 最新文献

Neuropsychology Review最新文献

英文 中文
Quo Vadis Forensic Neuropsychological Malingering Determinations? Reply to Drs. Bush, Faust, and Jewsbury. 库瓦迪斯的法医神经心理学危害判定?回复布什、浮士德和杰斯伯里博士。
IF 5.8 2区 心理学 Q1 NEUROSCIENCES Pub Date : 2023-09-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-18 DOI: 10.1007/s11065-023-09606-2
Christoph Leonhard

The thoughtful commentaries in this volume of Drs. Bush, Jewsbury, and Faust add to the impact of the two reviews in this volume of statistical and methodological issues in the forensic neuropsychological determination of malingering based on performance and symptom validity tests (PVTs and SVTs). In his commentary, Dr. Bush raises, among others, the important question of whether such malingering determinations can still be considered as meeting the legal Daubert standard which is the basis for neuropsychological expert testimony. Dr. Jewsbury focuses mostly on statistical issues and agrees with two key points of the statistical review: Positive likelihood chaining is not a mathematically tenable method to combine findings of multiple PVTs and SVTs, and the Simple Bayes method is not applicable to malingering determinations. Dr. Faust adds important narrative texture to the implications for forensic neuropsychological practice and points to a need for research into factors other than malingering that may explain PVT and SVT failures. These commentaries put into even sharper focus the serious questions raised in the reviews about the scientific basis of present practices in the forensic neuropsychological determination of malingering.

Bush、Jewsbury和Faust博士在本卷中的深思熟虑的评论增加了本卷中两篇评论的影响,这两篇评论涉及基于表现和症状有效性测试(PVT和SVT)确定装病的法医神经心理学问题。布什博士在评论中提出了一个重要问题,即这种装病的决定是否仍然可以被视为符合法律道伯特标准,而道伯特标准是神经心理学专家证词的基础。Jewsbury博士主要关注统计问题,并同意统计综述的两个关键点:正似然连锁在数学上不是一种结合多个PVT和SVT结果的可行方法,简单贝叶斯方法不适用于伪造确定。浮士德博士为法医神经心理学实践的含义添加了重要的叙事结构,并指出有必要研究除装病之外的其他因素,以解释PVT和SVT的失败。这些评论更加突出了评论中提出的严重问题,这些问题是关于目前确定装病的法医神经心理学实践的科学基础。
{"title":"Quo Vadis Forensic Neuropsychological Malingering Determinations? Reply to Drs. Bush, Faust, and Jewsbury.","authors":"Christoph Leonhard","doi":"10.1007/s11065-023-09606-2","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11065-023-09606-2","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The thoughtful commentaries in this volume of Drs. Bush, Jewsbury, and Faust add to the impact of the two reviews in this volume of statistical and methodological issues in the forensic neuropsychological determination of malingering based on performance and symptom validity tests (PVTs and SVTs). In his commentary, Dr. Bush raises, among others, the important question of whether such malingering determinations can still be considered as meeting the legal Daubert standard which is the basis for neuropsychological expert testimony. Dr. Jewsbury focuses mostly on statistical issues and agrees with two key points of the statistical review: Positive likelihood chaining is not a mathematically tenable method to combine findings of multiple PVTs and SVTs, and the Simple Bayes method is not applicable to malingering determinations. Dr. Faust adds important narrative texture to the implications for forensic neuropsychological practice and points to a need for research into factors other than malingering that may explain PVT and SVT failures. These commentaries put into even sharper focus the serious questions raised in the reviews about the scientific basis of present practices in the forensic neuropsychological determination of malingering.</p>","PeriodicalId":49754,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychology Review","volume":" ","pages":"653-657"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10021817","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Invited Commentary: Bayesian Inference with Multiple Tests. 受邀评论:贝叶斯推理与多重测试。
IF 5.8 2区 心理学 Q1 NEUROSCIENCES Pub Date : 2023-09-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-18 DOI: 10.1007/s11065-023-09604-4
Paul A Jewsbury

Dr. Leonhard presents a comprehensive and insightful critique of the existing malingering research literature and its implications for neuropsychological practice. Their statistical critique primarily focuses on the crucial issue of diagnostic inference when multiple tests are involved. While Leonhard effectively addresses certain misunderstandings, there are some overlooked misconceptions within the literature and a few new confusions were introduced. In order to provide a balanced commentary, this evaluation considers both Leonhard's critiques and the malingering research literature. Furthermore, a concise introduction to Bayesian diagnostic inference, utilizing the results of multiple tests, is provided. Misunderstandings regarding Bayesian inference are clarified, and a valid approach to Bayesian inference is elucidated. The assumptions underlying the simple Bayes model are thoroughly discussed, and it is demonstrated that the chained likelihood ratios method is an inappropriate application of this model due to one reason identified by Leonhard and another reason that has not been previously recognized. Leonhard's conclusions regarding the primary dependence of incremental validity on unconditional correlations and the alleged mathematical incorrectness of the simple Bayes model are refuted. Finally, potential directions for future research and practice in this field are explored and discussed.

Leonhard博士对现有的装病研究文献及其对神经心理学实践的影响提出了全面而深刻的批评。他们的统计批判主要集中在涉及多项测试时的诊断推理这一关键问题上。虽然Leonhard有效地解决了某些误解,但文献中也存在一些被忽视的误解,并引入了一些新的困惑。为了提供一个平衡的评论,这项评估考虑了Leonhard的批评和装病的研究文献。此外,还简要介绍了利用多次测试的结果进行贝叶斯诊断推理。澄清了对贝叶斯推理的误解,阐明了一种有效的贝叶斯推理方法。对简单贝叶斯模型的基本假设进行了深入的讨论,并证明了由于Leonhard确定的一个原因和另一个以前没有认识到的原因,链式似然比方法是该模型的不适当应用。Leonhard关于增量有效性主要依赖于无条件相关性的结论以及简单贝叶斯模型所谓的数学错误性被驳斥。最后,对该领域未来研究和实践的潜在方向进行了探索和讨论。
{"title":"Invited Commentary: Bayesian Inference with Multiple Tests.","authors":"Paul A Jewsbury","doi":"10.1007/s11065-023-09604-4","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11065-023-09604-4","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Dr. Leonhard presents a comprehensive and insightful critique of the existing malingering research literature and its implications for neuropsychological practice. Their statistical critique primarily focuses on the crucial issue of diagnostic inference when multiple tests are involved. While Leonhard effectively addresses certain misunderstandings, there are some overlooked misconceptions within the literature and a few new confusions were introduced. In order to provide a balanced commentary, this evaluation considers both Leonhard's critiques and the malingering research literature. Furthermore, a concise introduction to Bayesian diagnostic inference, utilizing the results of multiple tests, is provided. Misunderstandings regarding Bayesian inference are clarified, and a valid approach to Bayesian inference is elucidated. The assumptions underlying the simple Bayes model are thoroughly discussed, and it is demonstrated that the chained likelihood ratios method is an inappropriate application of this model due to one reason identified by Leonhard and another reason that has not been previously recognized. Leonhard's conclusions regarding the primary dependence of incremental validity on unconditional correlations and the alleged mathematical incorrectness of the simple Bayes model are refuted. Finally, potential directions for future research and practice in this field are explored and discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":49754,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychology Review","volume":" ","pages":"643-652"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10021823","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Editorial. 社论
IF 5.8 2区 心理学 Q1 NEUROSCIENCES Pub Date : 2023-09-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-18 DOI: 10.1007/s11065-023-09610-6
Stephen C Bowden, David W Loring
{"title":"Editorial.","authors":"Stephen C Bowden,&nbsp;David W Loring","doi":"10.1007/s11065-023-09610-6","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11065-023-09610-6","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":49754,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychology Review","volume":" ","pages":"579-580"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10021824","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Invited Commentary: Advancing but not yet Advanced: Assessment of Effort/Malingering in Forensic and Clinical Settings. 受邀评论:进展但尚未进展:法医和临床环境中的努力/危害评估。
IF 5.8 2区 心理学 Q1 NEUROSCIENCES Pub Date : 2023-09-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-18 DOI: 10.1007/s11065-023-09605-3
David Faust

Neuropsychologists' conclusions and courtroom testimony on malingering can have profound impact. Intensive and ingenious research has advanced our capacities to identify both insufficient and sufficient effort and thus make worthy contributions to just conflict resolution. Nevertheless, given multiple converging factors, such as misleadingly high accuracy rates in many studies, practitioners may well develop inflated confidence in methods for evaluating effort/malingering. Considerable research shows that overconfidence often increases diagnostic and predictive error and may lead to fixed conclusions when caution is better advised. Leonhard's work thus performs an important service by alerting us to methodological considerations and shortcomings that can generate misimpressions about the efficacy of effort/malingering assessment. The present commentary covers various additional complicating factors in malingering assessment, including other factors that also inflate confidence; subtle and perhaps underappreciated methodological flaws that are inversely related to positive study outcomes (i.e., the worse the flaws the better methods appear to be); oversimplified classifications schemes for studying and evaluating effort that overlook, for example, common mixed presentations (e.g., malingering and genuinely injured); and the need to expand research across a greater range and severity of neuropsychological conditions and diverse groups. More generally, although endorsing various points that Leonhard raises, a number of questions and concerns are presented, such as methods for calculating the impact of case exclusions in studies. Ultimately, although Leonhard's conclusions may be more negative than is justified, it seems fair to categorize methods for assessing malingering/effort as advancing, but not yet advanced, with much more needed to be done to approach that latter status.

神经心理学家关于装病的结论和法庭证词会产生深远的影响。深入而巧妙的研究提高了我们的能力,使我们能够识别不足和充分的努力,从而为公正解决冲突作出有价值的贡献。然而,考虑到多种趋同因素,例如许多研究中误导性的高准确率,从业者很可能会对评估努力/装病的方法产生膨胀的信心。大量研究表明,过度自信往往会增加诊断和预测错误,并可能在更谨慎的情况下得出固定的结论。因此,Leonhard的工作提供了重要的服务,提醒我们注意方法上的考虑和缺点,这些考虑和缺点可能会对努力/装病评估的效果产生错误印象。本评注涵盖了装病评估中的各种其他复杂因素,包括也会夸大信心的其他因素;微妙且可能被低估的方法缺陷与积极的研究结果呈负相关(即,缺陷越严重,方法似乎越好);用于研究和评估工作的过于简化的分类方案,例如忽略了常见的混合陈述(例如装病和真正受伤);以及需要将研究扩展到更大范围和更严重的神经心理状况和不同群体。更普遍地说,尽管支持Leonhard提出的各种观点,但也提出了一些问题和担忧,例如计算研究中排除病例影响的方法。最终,尽管Leonhard的结论可能比合理的更为负面,但将评估装病/努力的方法归类为先进但尚未先进似乎是公平的,要达到后一种状态还需要做更多的工作。
{"title":"Invited Commentary: Advancing but not yet Advanced: Assessment of Effort/Malingering in Forensic and Clinical Settings.","authors":"David Faust","doi":"10.1007/s11065-023-09605-3","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11065-023-09605-3","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Neuropsychologists' conclusions and courtroom testimony on malingering can have profound impact. Intensive and ingenious research has advanced our capacities to identify both insufficient and sufficient effort and thus make worthy contributions to just conflict resolution. Nevertheless, given multiple converging factors, such as misleadingly high accuracy rates in many studies, practitioners may well develop inflated confidence in methods for evaluating effort/malingering. Considerable research shows that overconfidence often increases diagnostic and predictive error and may lead to fixed conclusions when caution is better advised. Leonhard's work thus performs an important service by alerting us to methodological considerations and shortcomings that can generate misimpressions about the efficacy of effort/malingering assessment. The present commentary covers various additional complicating factors in malingering assessment, including other factors that also inflate confidence; subtle and perhaps underappreciated methodological flaws that are inversely related to positive study outcomes (i.e., the worse the flaws the better methods appear to be); oversimplified classifications schemes for studying and evaluating effort that overlook, for example, common mixed presentations (e.g., malingering and genuinely injured); and the need to expand research across a greater range and severity of neuropsychological conditions and diverse groups. More generally, although endorsing various points that Leonhard raises, a number of questions and concerns are presented, such as methods for calculating the impact of case exclusions in studies. Ultimately, although Leonhard's conclusions may be more negative than is justified, it seems fair to categorize methods for assessing malingering/effort as advancing, but not yet advanced, with much more needed to be done to approach that latter status.</p>","PeriodicalId":49754,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychology Review","volume":" ","pages":"628-642"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10012747","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Correction to: Interventions with an Impact on Cognitive Functions in Cerebral Palsy: A Systematic Review. 纠正:干预对脑瘫患者认知功能的影响:一项系统综述。
IF 5.8 2区 心理学 Q1 NEUROSCIENCES Pub Date : 2023-06-01 DOI: 10.1007/s11065-023-09590-7
Montse Blasco, María García-Galant, Alba Berenguer-González, Xavier Caldú, Miquel Arqué, Olga Laporta-Hoyos, Júlia Ballester-Plané, Júlia Miralbell, María Ángeles Jurado, Roser Pueyo
{"title":"Correction to: Interventions with an Impact on Cognitive Functions in Cerebral Palsy: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Montse Blasco,&nbsp;María García-Galant,&nbsp;Alba Berenguer-González,&nbsp;Xavier Caldú,&nbsp;Miquel Arqué,&nbsp;Olga Laporta-Hoyos,&nbsp;Júlia Ballester-Plané,&nbsp;Júlia Miralbell,&nbsp;María Ángeles Jurado,&nbsp;Roser Pueyo","doi":"10.1007/s11065-023-09590-7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-023-09590-7","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":49754,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychology Review","volume":"33 2","pages":"578"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9361961","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Quantitative Meta-analyses of Cognitive Abilities in Children With Pediatric-onset Multiple Sclerosis. 儿童期多发性硬化症患儿认知能力的定量荟萃分析。
IF 5.8 2区 心理学 Q1 NEUROSCIENCES Pub Date : 2023-06-01 DOI: 10.1007/s11065-022-09546-3
Elena S Lysenko, Mariia D Bogdanova, Marie Arsalidou

Pediatric-onset multiple sclerosis (POMS), is the manifestation of multiple sclerosis in individuals before 18 years of age. About a third of children with POMS show some form of lower cognitive performance. The purpose of this study is to examine using quantitative meta-analyses the effect size of altered performance between children with and without POMS on overall intelligence quotient (IQ), information processing speed, and language functions. We searched the literature for studies that reported scores on cognitive tests administered to children with and without POMS. Studies were systematically reviewed using PRISMA guidelines. We analyzed data from 14 studies that examined 1283 children with and without POMS when cognitive categories consisted of five or more studies. Effect sizes, publication bias and potential confounds were considered. Significant cognitive differences are revealed for all categories with the strongest effect observed for overall IQ. A moderate effect is observed for information processing speed, and small effects for verbal fluency and verbal memory. Cognitive abilities present differently in children with POMS and a better understanding of this manifestation will inform intervention and remediation tools that can improve clinical and educational practice for the benefit of children with POMS.

小儿起病多发性硬化症(POMS),是18岁前个体多发性硬化症的表现。大约三分之一患有POMS的儿童表现出某种形式的认知能力下降。本研究的目的是通过定量荟萃分析来检验POMS患儿和非POMS患儿在整体智商、信息处理速度和语言功能上的影响大小。我们检索了文献,研究报告了对患有和不患有POMS的儿童进行的认知测试得分。使用PRISMA指南系统地审查了研究。我们分析了14项研究的数据,这些研究调查了1283名有或没有POMS的儿童,当认知类别包括5项或更多研究时。考虑了效应量、发表偏倚和潜在混淆。在所有类别中都发现了显著的认知差异,其中对整体智商的影响最大。对信息处理速度有中等程度的影响,对言语流畅性和言语记忆的影响较小。认知能力在POMS儿童中表现出不同的表现,更好地了解这种表现将为干预和补救工具提供信息,从而改善POMS儿童的临床和教育实践。
{"title":"Quantitative Meta-analyses of Cognitive Abilities in Children With Pediatric-onset Multiple Sclerosis.","authors":"Elena S Lysenko,&nbsp;Mariia D Bogdanova,&nbsp;Marie Arsalidou","doi":"10.1007/s11065-022-09546-3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-022-09546-3","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Pediatric-onset multiple sclerosis (POMS), is the manifestation of multiple sclerosis in individuals before 18 years of age. About a third of children with POMS show some form of lower cognitive performance. The purpose of this study is to examine using quantitative meta-analyses the effect size of altered performance between children with and without POMS on overall intelligence quotient (IQ), information processing speed, and language functions. We searched the literature for studies that reported scores on cognitive tests administered to children with and without POMS. Studies were systematically reviewed using PRISMA guidelines. We analyzed data from 14 studies that examined 1283 children with and without POMS when cognitive categories consisted of five or more studies. Effect sizes, publication bias and potential confounds were considered. Significant cognitive differences are revealed for all categories with the strongest effect observed for overall IQ. A moderate effect is observed for information processing speed, and small effects for verbal fluency and verbal memory. Cognitive abilities present differently in children with POMS and a better understanding of this manifestation will inform intervention and remediation tools that can improve clinical and educational practice for the benefit of children with POMS.</p>","PeriodicalId":49754,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychology Review","volume":"33 2","pages":"459-473"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9396077","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Deep Brain Stimulation in Parkinson Disease: A Meta-analysis of the Long-term Neuropsychological Outcomes. 脑深部刺激治疗帕金森病:长期神经心理学结果的荟萃分析
IF 5.8 2区 心理学 Q1 NEUROSCIENCES Pub Date : 2023-06-01 DOI: 10.1007/s11065-022-09540-9
Madalina Bucur, Costanza Papagno

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the subthalamic nucleus (STN) or globus pallidum internus (GPi) improves motor functions in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) but may cause a decline in specific cognitive domains. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the long-term (1-3 years) effects of STN or GPi DBS on four cognitive functions: (i) memory (delayed recall, working memory, immediate recall), (ii) executive functions including inhibition control (Color-Word Stroop test) and flexibility (phonemic verbal fluency), (iii) language (semantic verbal fluency), and (iv) mood (anxiety and depression). Medline and Web of Science were searched, and studies published before July 2021 investigating long-term changes in PD patients following DBS were included. Random-effects model meta-analyses were performed using the R software to estimate the standardized mean difference (SMD) computed as Hedges' g with 95% CI. 2522 publications were identified, 48 of which satisfied the inclusion criteria. Fourteen meta-analyses were performed including 2039 adults with a clinical diagnosis of PD undergoing DBS surgery and 271 PD controls. Our findings add new information to the existing literature by demonstrating that, at a long follow-up interval (1-3 years), both positive effects, such as a mild improvement in anxiety and depression (STN, Hedges' g = 0,34, p = 0,02), and negative effects, such as a decrease of long-term memory (Hedges' g = -0,40, p = 0,02), verbal fluency such as phonemic fluency (Hedges' g = -0,56, p < 0,0001), and specific subdomains of executive functions such as Color-Word Stroop test (Hedges' g = -0,45, p = 0,003) were observed. The level of evidence as qualified with GRADE varied from low for the pre- verses post-analysis to medium when compared to a control group.

脑深部刺激(DBS)丘脑下核(STN)或内白球(GPi)改善帕金森病患者的运动功能,但可能导致特定认知领域的下降。本系统综述和荟萃分析的目的是评估STN或GPi DBS对四项认知功能的长期(1-3年)影响:(i)记忆(延迟回忆、工作记忆、即时回忆),(ii)执行功能(包括抑制控制(颜色-单词Stroop测试)和灵活性(音位语言流畅性),(iii)语言(语义语言流畅性),(iv)情绪(焦虑和抑郁)。我们检索了Medline和Web of Science,并纳入了2021年7月之前发表的关于DBS后PD患者长期变化的研究。随机效应模型荟萃分析使用R软件来估计标准化平均差(SMD),计算为Hedges' g, 95% CI。确定了2522份出版物,其中48份符合纳入标准。进行了14项荟萃分析,包括2039名临床诊断为PD并接受DBS手术的成年人和271名PD对照组。我们的研究结果为现有文献增加了新的信息,表明在较长的随访间隔(1-3年),积极影响,如焦虑和抑郁的轻度改善(STN, Hedges' g = 0,34, p = 0,02),消极影响,如长期记忆的减少(Hedges' g = -0,40, p = 0,02),语言流利,如音位流利(Hedges' g = -0,56, p
{"title":"Deep Brain Stimulation in Parkinson Disease: A Meta-analysis of the Long-term Neuropsychological Outcomes.","authors":"Madalina Bucur,&nbsp;Costanza Papagno","doi":"10.1007/s11065-022-09540-9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-022-09540-9","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the subthalamic nucleus (STN) or globus pallidum internus (GPi) improves motor functions in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) but may cause a decline in specific cognitive domains. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the long-term (1-3 years) effects of STN or GPi DBS on four cognitive functions: (i) memory (delayed recall, working memory, immediate recall), (ii) executive functions including inhibition control (Color-Word Stroop test) and flexibility (phonemic verbal fluency), (iii) language (semantic verbal fluency), and (iv) mood (anxiety and depression). Medline and Web of Science were searched, and studies published before July 2021 investigating long-term changes in PD patients following DBS were included. Random-effects model meta-analyses were performed using the R software to estimate the standardized mean difference (SMD) computed as Hedges' g with 95% CI. 2522 publications were identified, 48 of which satisfied the inclusion criteria. Fourteen meta-analyses were performed including 2039 adults with a clinical diagnosis of PD undergoing DBS surgery and 271 PD controls. Our findings add new information to the existing literature by demonstrating that, at a long follow-up interval (1-3 years), both positive effects, such as a mild improvement in anxiety and depression (STN, Hedges' g = 0,34, p = 0,02), and negative effects, such as a decrease of long-term memory (Hedges' g = -0,40, p = 0,02), verbal fluency such as phonemic fluency (Hedges' g = -0,56, p < 0,0001), and specific subdomains of executive functions such as Color-Word Stroop test (Hedges' g = -0,45, p = 0,003) were observed. The level of evidence as qualified with GRADE varied from low for the pre- verses post-analysis to medium when compared to a control group.</p>","PeriodicalId":49754,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychology Review","volume":"33 2","pages":"307-346"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10148791/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9764744","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16
A Systematic Review on Common and Distinct Neural Correlates of Risk-taking in Substance-related and Non-substance Related Addictions. 物质相关和非物质相关成瘾中冒险行为的共同和独特神经关联的系统综述。
IF 5.8 2区 心理学 Q1 NEUROSCIENCES Pub Date : 2023-06-01 DOI: 10.1007/s11065-022-09552-5
Philippa Hüpen, Ute Habel, Mikhail Votinov, Joseph W Kable, Lisa Wagels

Both substance-related as well as non-substance-related addictions may include recurrent engagement in risky actions despite adverse outcomes. We here apply a unified approach and review task-based neuroimaging studies on substance-related (SRAs) and non-substance related addictions (NSRAs) to examine commonalities and differences in neural correlates of risk-taking in these two addiction types. To this end, we conducted a systematic review adhering to the PRISMA guidelines. Two databases were searched with predefined search terms to identify neuroimaging studies on risk-taking tasks in individuals with addiction disorders. In total, 19 studies on SRAs (comprising a total of 648 individuals with SRAs) and 10 studies on NSRAs (comprising a total of 187 individuals with NSRAs) were included. Risk-related brain activation in SRAs and NSRAs was summarized individually and subsequently compared to each other. Results suggest convergent altered risk-related neural processes, including hyperactivity in the OFC and the striatum. As characteristic for both addiction types, these brain regions may represent an underlying mechanism of suboptimal decision-making. In contrast, decreased DLPFC activity may be specific to SRAs and decreased IFG activity could only be identified for NSRAs. The precuneus and posterior cingulate show elevated activity in SRAs, while findings regarding these areas were mixed in NSRAs. Additional scarce evidence suggests decreased ventral ACC activity and increased dorsal ACC activity in both addiction types. Associations between identified activation patterns with drug use severity underpin the clinical relevance of these findings. However, this exploratory evidence should be interpreted with caution and should be regarded as preliminary. Future research is needed to evaluate the findings gathered by this review.

物质相关成瘾和非物质相关成瘾都可能包括不顾不良后果反复从事危险行为。在此,我们采用统一的方法,回顾了基于任务的物质相关成瘾(sra)和非物质相关成瘾(nsra)的神经影像学研究,以检查这两种成瘾类型中冒险神经相关因素的共性和差异。为此,我们根据PRISMA指南进行了系统审查。用预定义的搜索词搜索了两个数据库,以确定成瘾障碍患者冒险任务的神经影像学研究。共纳入19项SRAs研究(共648例SRAs患者)和10项nsra研究(共187例nsra患者)。分别总结SRAs和nsra的风险相关脑激活情况,然后相互比较。结果表明,趋同性改变了风险相关的神经过程,包括OFC和纹状体的过度活跃。作为两种成瘾类型的特征,这些大脑区域可能代表了次优决策的潜在机制。相反,DLPFC活性的降低可能是sra所特有的,而IFG活性的降低只能在nsra中发现。在sra中,楔前叶和后扣带的活动升高,而在nsra中,这些区域的发现是混合的。额外的稀缺证据表明,在两种成瘾类型中,腹侧前扣带活动减少,背侧前扣带活动增加。已确定的激活模式与药物使用严重程度之间的关联支持了这些发现的临床相关性。然而,这一探索性证据应谨慎解释,并应视为初步证据。需要进一步的研究来评估本综述收集的发现。
{"title":"A Systematic Review on Common and Distinct Neural Correlates of Risk-taking in Substance-related and Non-substance Related Addictions.","authors":"Philippa Hüpen,&nbsp;Ute Habel,&nbsp;Mikhail Votinov,&nbsp;Joseph W Kable,&nbsp;Lisa Wagels","doi":"10.1007/s11065-022-09552-5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-022-09552-5","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Both substance-related as well as non-substance-related addictions may include recurrent engagement in risky actions despite adverse outcomes. We here apply a unified approach and review task-based neuroimaging studies on substance-related (SRAs) and non-substance related addictions (NSRAs) to examine commonalities and differences in neural correlates of risk-taking in these two addiction types. To this end, we conducted a systematic review adhering to the PRISMA guidelines. Two databases were searched with predefined search terms to identify neuroimaging studies on risk-taking tasks in individuals with addiction disorders. In total, 19 studies on SRAs (comprising a total of 648 individuals with SRAs) and 10 studies on NSRAs (comprising a total of 187 individuals with NSRAs) were included. Risk-related brain activation in SRAs and NSRAs was summarized individually and subsequently compared to each other. Results suggest convergent altered risk-related neural processes, including hyperactivity in the OFC and the striatum. As characteristic for both addiction types, these brain regions may represent an underlying mechanism of suboptimal decision-making. In contrast, decreased DLPFC activity may be specific to SRAs and decreased IFG activity could only be identified for NSRAs. The precuneus and posterior cingulate show elevated activity in SRAs, while findings regarding these areas were mixed in NSRAs. Additional scarce evidence suggests decreased ventral ACC activity and increased dorsal ACC activity in both addiction types. Associations between identified activation patterns with drug use severity underpin the clinical relevance of these findings. However, this exploratory evidence should be interpreted with caution and should be regarded as preliminary. Future research is needed to evaluate the findings gathered by this review.</p>","PeriodicalId":49754,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychology Review","volume":"33 2","pages":"492-513"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10148787/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9389268","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
The Cognitive Profile of Atypical Parkinsonism: A Meta-Analysis. 非典型帕金森病的认知概况:一项荟萃分析。
IF 5.8 2区 心理学 Q1 NEUROSCIENCES Pub Date : 2023-06-01 DOI: 10.1007/s11065-022-09551-6
Simona Raimo, Mariachiara Gaita, Maria Cropano, Giusi Mautone, Alfonsina D'Iorio, Luigi Trojano, Gabriella Santangelo

Atypical Parkinsonism (AP) syndromes are characterized by a wide spectrum of non-motor symptoms including prominent attentional and executive deficits. However, the cognitive profile of AP and its differences and similarities with that of Parkinson's Disease (PD) are still a matter of debate. The present meta-analysis aimed at identifying patterns of cognitive impairment in AP by comparing global cognitive functioning, memory, executive functions, visuospatial abilities, language, non-verbal reasoning, and processing speed test performances of patients with AP relative to healthy controls and patients with PD. All investigated cognitive domains showed a substantial impairment in patients with AP compared to healthy controls. When AP syndromes were considered separately, their cognitive functioning was distributed along a continuum from Multiple Systemic Atrophy at one extreme, with the least impaired cognitive profile (similar to that observed in PD) to Progressive Supranuclear Palsy, with the greatest decline in global cognitive and executive functioning (similar to Corticobasal Syndrome). These findings indicate that widespread cognitive impairment could represent an important clinical indicator to distinguish AP from other movement disorders.

非典型帕金森病(AP)综合征的特点是广泛的非运动症状,包括突出的注意力和执行缺陷。然而,AP的认知特征及其与帕金森病(PD)的差异和相似之处仍然存在争议。本荟萃分析旨在通过比较AP患者相对于健康对照组和PD患者的整体认知功能、记忆、执行功能、视觉空间能力、语言、非言语推理和处理速度测试表现,来确定AP认知功能障碍的模式。与健康对照组相比,所有被调查的AP患者的认知领域都显示出实质性的损害。当单独考虑AP综合征时,他们的认知功能沿一个连续体分布,从一个极端的多发性系统性萎缩,认知功能受损最少(与PD观察到的相似)到进行性核上性麻痹,整体认知和执行功能下降最大(与皮质基底综合征相似)。这些发现表明,广泛的认知障碍可能是区分AP与其他运动障碍的重要临床指标。
{"title":"The Cognitive Profile of Atypical Parkinsonism: A Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Simona Raimo,&nbsp;Mariachiara Gaita,&nbsp;Maria Cropano,&nbsp;Giusi Mautone,&nbsp;Alfonsina D'Iorio,&nbsp;Luigi Trojano,&nbsp;Gabriella Santangelo","doi":"10.1007/s11065-022-09551-6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-022-09551-6","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Atypical Parkinsonism (AP) syndromes are characterized by a wide spectrum of non-motor symptoms including prominent attentional and executive deficits. However, the cognitive profile of AP and its differences and similarities with that of Parkinson's Disease (PD) are still a matter of debate. The present meta-analysis aimed at identifying patterns of cognitive impairment in AP by comparing global cognitive functioning, memory, executive functions, visuospatial abilities, language, non-verbal reasoning, and processing speed test performances of patients with AP relative to healthy controls and patients with PD. All investigated cognitive domains showed a substantial impairment in patients with AP compared to healthy controls. When AP syndromes were considered separately, their cognitive functioning was distributed along a continuum from Multiple Systemic Atrophy at one extreme, with the least impaired cognitive profile (similar to that observed in PD) to Progressive Supranuclear Palsy, with the greatest decline in global cognitive and executive functioning (similar to Corticobasal Syndrome). These findings indicate that widespread cognitive impairment could represent an important clinical indicator to distinguish AP from other movement disorders.</p>","PeriodicalId":49754,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychology Review","volume":"33 2","pages":"514-543"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9749284","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Effectiveness of Pharmacotherapy for Depression after Adult Traumatic Brain Injury: an Umbrella Review. 成人脑外伤后抑郁症的药物治疗效果:综述。
IF 5.4 2区 心理学 Q1 NEUROSCIENCES Pub Date : 2023-06-01 Epub Date: 2022-06-14 DOI: 10.1007/s11065-022-09543-6
Amelia J Hicks, Fiona J Clay, Amelia C James, Malcolm Hopwood, Jennie L Ponsford

Symptoms of depression are common following traumatic brain injury (TBI), impacting survivors' ability to return to work, participate in leisure activities, and placing strain on relationships. Depression symptoms post TBI are often managed with pharmacotherapy, however, there is little research evidence to guide clinical practice. There have been a number of recent systematic reviews examining pharmacotherapy for post TBI depression. The aim of this umbrella review was to synthesize systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the effectiveness of pharmacotherapy for the management of post TBI depression in adults. Eligible reviews examined any pharmacotherapy against any comparators, for the treatment of depression in adults who had sustained TBI. Seven databases were searched, with additional searching of online journals, Research Gate, Google Scholar and the TRIP Medical Database to identify published and unpublished systematic reviews and meta-analyses in English up to May 2020. A systematic review of primary studies available between March 2018 and May 2020 was also conducted. Evidence quality was assessed using Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Instruments. The results are presented as a narrative synthesis. Twenty-two systematic reviews were identified, of which ten reviews contained a meta-analysis. No new primary studies were identified in the systematic review. There was insufficient high quality and methodologically rigorous evidence to recommend prescribing any specific drug or drug class for post TBI depression. The findings do show, however, that depression post TBI is responsive to pharmacotherapy in at least some individuals. Recommendations for primary studies, systematic reviews and advice for prescribers is provided. Review Registration PROSPERO (CRD42020184915).

创伤性脑损伤(TBI)后抑郁症状很常见,影响幸存者重返工作岗位、参加休闲活动的能力,并给人际关系带来压力。创伤性脑损伤后的抑郁症状通常会通过药物治疗来控制,但指导临床实践的研究证据却很少。最近有许多系统性综述对创伤后抑郁症的药物治疗进行了研究。本综述旨在对药物疗法治疗成人创伤后抑郁症的有效性进行系统综述和荟萃分析。符合条件的综述研究了任何药物疗法与任何参照物的对比,以治疗持续性创伤后抑郁的成人。我们检索了七个数据库,还检索了在线期刊、Research Gate、谷歌学术和TRIP医学数据库,以确定截至2020年5月已发表和未发表的英文系统综述和荟萃分析。此外,还对 2018 年 3 月至 2020 年 5 月期间的主要研究进行了系统综述。证据质量采用乔安娜-布里格斯研究所的关键评估工具进行评估。结果以叙述性综述的形式呈现。共确定了 22 篇系统综述,其中 10 篇综述包含荟萃分析。系统综述中没有发现新的主要研究。没有足够的高质量、方法严谨的证据来建议针对创伤后抑郁症处方任何特定的药物或药物类别。不过,研究结果确实表明,至少在某些人中,创伤后抑郁症对药物治疗是有反应的。本研究为初级研究、系统性综述提供了建议,并为处方者提供了建议。审查注册 PROSPERO (CRD42020184915)。
{"title":"Effectiveness of Pharmacotherapy for Depression after Adult Traumatic Brain Injury: an Umbrella Review.","authors":"Amelia J Hicks, Fiona J Clay, Amelia C James, Malcolm Hopwood, Jennie L Ponsford","doi":"10.1007/s11065-022-09543-6","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11065-022-09543-6","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Symptoms of depression are common following traumatic brain injury (TBI), impacting survivors' ability to return to work, participate in leisure activities, and placing strain on relationships. Depression symptoms post TBI are often managed with pharmacotherapy, however, there is little research evidence to guide clinical practice. There have been a number of recent systematic reviews examining pharmacotherapy for post TBI depression. The aim of this umbrella review was to synthesize systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the effectiveness of pharmacotherapy for the management of post TBI depression in adults. Eligible reviews examined any pharmacotherapy against any comparators, for the treatment of depression in adults who had sustained TBI. Seven databases were searched, with additional searching of online journals, Research Gate, Google Scholar and the TRIP Medical Database to identify published and unpublished systematic reviews and meta-analyses in English up to May 2020. A systematic review of primary studies available between March 2018 and May 2020 was also conducted. Evidence quality was assessed using Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Instruments. The results are presented as a narrative synthesis. Twenty-two systematic reviews were identified, of which ten reviews contained a meta-analysis. No new primary studies were identified in the systematic review. There was insufficient high quality and methodologically rigorous evidence to recommend prescribing any specific drug or drug class for post TBI depression. The findings do show, however, that depression post TBI is responsive to pharmacotherapy in at least some individuals. Recommendations for primary studies, systematic reviews and advice for prescribers is provided. Review Registration PROSPERO (CRD42020184915).</p>","PeriodicalId":49754,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychology Review","volume":"33 2","pages":"393-431"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10148771/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9409226","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
Neuropsychology Review
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1