4.7 Review

Episodic and working memory function in Primary Progressive Aphasia: A meta-analysis

期刊

NEUROSCIENCE AND BIOBEHAVIORAL REVIEWS
卷 92, 期 -, 页码 243-254

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2018.06.015

关键词

Primary progressive aphasia; Progressive nonfluent aphasia; Logopenic aphasia; Semantic dementia; Frontotemporal dementia; Memory; Systematic review; Meta-analysis

资金

  1. Gravitation Grant of the Language in Interaction Consortium from the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO) [024.001.006]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The distinction between Primary Progressive Aphasia (PPA) variants remains challenging for clinicians, especially for the non-fluent (nfv-PPA) and the logopenic variants (lv-PPA). Previous research suggests that memory tests might aid this differentiation. This meta-analysis compares memory function among PPA variants. Method: Effects sizes were extracted from 41 studies (N = 849). Random-effects models were used to compare performance on episodic and working memory tests among PPA patients and healthy controls, and between the PPA variants. Results: Memory deficits were frequently observed in PPA compared to controls, with large effect sizes for lv-PPA (Hedges' g = -2.04 [-2.58 to -1.49]), nfv-PPA (Hedges' g = -1.26 ([-1.60 to -0.92], p <.001)), and the semantic variant (sv-PPA; Hedges' g = -1.23 [-1.50 to -0.97]). Sv-PPA showed primarily verbal memory deficits, whereas lv-PPA showed worse performance than nfv-PPA on both verbal and non-verbal memory tests. Conclusions: Memory deficits were more pronounced in lv-PPA compared to nfv-PPA. This suggests that memory tests may be helpful to distinguish between these PPA variants.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据