4.2 Article

Prospective memory deficits in euthymic bipolar disorder patients: A preliminary study

期刊

ASIA-PACIFIC PSYCHIATRY
卷 5, 期 3, 页码 183-190

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/appy.12019

关键词

bipolar disorder; euthymia; intelligence; prospective memory; retrospective memory

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30800367, 30770776]
  2. Beijing Sciences and Technology Nova Program [2008B59]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: Prospective memory refers to the ability to remember to do something in the future. To date, little is known about prospective memory deficits in bipolar disorder (BD) in remission (euthymia). This study examined the nature and correlates of prospective memory in these patients. Methods: Forty-seven euthymic BD patients and 47 matched healthy controls formed the study sample. Socio-demographic and basic clinical characteristics, prospective memory (Cambridge Prospective Memory Test [CAMPROMPT]), retrospective memory (immediate Logical Memory subtests of the Wechsler Memory Scales-Revised [WMS-R]), IQ (Raven's Progressive Matrices) and executive functioning (Wisconsin Card Sorting Test) were measured in all participants; patients' symptoms were rated with the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and the 11-item Young Mania Rating Scale. Results: Patients performed significantly worse on time-based prospective memory compared to controls. Multivariate analyses revealed that patients' lower score on Raven's Progressive Matrices significantly contributed to poor performance on time-based prospective memory, whereas lower scores on WMS-R Logical Memory subtest contributed to poor performance on event-based prospective memory; in controls, lower education level and older age significantly contributed to poor performance on time-based and event-based prospective memory, respectively. Discussion: Prospective memory deficits persist in remitted BD patients suggesting that prospective memory impairment constitutes a trait deficit in BD.

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

4.2
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