Search

Contains fulltext : 247347.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access), Objective: While declarative learning is dependent on the hippocampus, procedural learning and repetition priming can operate independently from the hippocampus, making them potential targets for behavioral interventions that utilize non-declarative memory systems to compensate for the declarative learning deficits associated with hippocampal insult. Few studies have assessed procedural learning and repetition priming in individuals with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI). Method: This study offers an overview across declarative, conceptual repetition priming, and procedural learning tasks by providing between-group effect sizes and Bayes Factors (BFs) comparing individuals with aMCI and controls. Seventy-six individuals with aMCI and 83 cognitively unimpaired controls were assessed. We hypothesized to see the largest differences between individuals with aMCI and controls on declarative learning, followed by conceptual repetition priming, with the smallest differences on procedural learning. Results: Consistent with our hypotheses, we found large differences between groups with supporting BFs on declarative learning. For conceptual repetition priming, we found a small-to-moderate between-group effect size and a non-conclusive BF somewhat in favor of a difference between groups. We found more variable but overall trivial differences on procedural learning tasks, with inconclusive BFs, in line with expectations. Conclusions: The current results suggest that conceptual repetition priming does not remain intact in individuals with aMCI while procedural learning may remain intact. While additional studies are needed, our results contribute to the evidence-base that suggests that procedural learning may remain spared in aMCI and helps inform behavioral interventions that aim to utilize procedural learning in this population.

28 februari 2022, Item does not contain fulltext, Objective: While declarative learning is dependent on the hippocampus, procedural learning and repetition priming can operate independently from the hippocampus, making them potential targets for behavioral interventions that utilize non-declarative memory systems to compensate for the declarative learning deficits associated with hippocampal insult. Few studies have assessed procedural learning and repetition priming in individuals with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI). Method: This study offers an overview across declarative, conceptual repetition priming, and procedural learning tasks by providing between-group effect sizes and Bayes Factors (BFs) comparing individuals with aMCI and controls. Seventy-six individuals with aMCI and 83 cognitively unimpaired controls were assessed. We hypothesized to see the largest differences between individuals with aMCI and controls on declarative learning, followed by conceptual repetition priming, with the smallest differences on procedural learning. Results: Consistent with our hypotheses, we found large differences between groups with supporting BFs on declarative learning. For conceptual repetition priming, we found a small-to-moderate between-group effect size and a non-conclusive BF somewhat in favor of a difference between groups. We found more variable but overall trivial differences on procedural learning tasks, with inconclusive BFs, in line with expectations. Conclusions: The current results suggest that conceptual repetition priming does not remain intact in individuals with aMCI while procedural learning may remain intact. While additional studies are needed, our results contribute to the evidence-base that suggests that procedural learning may remain spared in aMCI and helps inform behavioral interventions that aim to utilize procedural learning in this population.

Contains fulltext : 234369.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), The literature on repetition priming in Alzheimer's disease (AD) is inconsistent, with some findings supporting spared priming while others do not. Several factors may explain these inconsistencies, including AD severity (e.g., dementia vs. Mild Cognitive Impairment; MCI) and priming paradigm-related characteristics. This systematic review and meta-analysis provides a quantitative summary of repetition priming in AD. We examined the between-group standard mean difference comparing repetition priming in AD dementia or amnestic MCI (aMCI; presumably due to AD) to controls. Thirty-two studies were selected, including 590 individuals with AD dementia, 267 individuals with amnestic MCI, and 703 controls. Our results indicated that both individuals with aMCI and AD dementia perform worse on repetition priming tasks than cognitively older adults. Paradigm-related moderators suggested that the effect size between studies comparing the combined aMCI or AD dementia group to cognitively healthy older adults was the highest for paradigms that required participants to produce, rather than identify, primes during the test phase. Our results further suggested that priming in AD is impaired for both conceptual and perceptual priming tasks. Lastly, while our results suggested that priming in AD is impaired for priming tasks that require deep processing, we were unable to draw firm conclusions about whether priming is less impaired in aMCI or AD dementia for paradigms that require shallow processing.

25 april 2021, Item does not contain fulltext, The literature on repetition priming in Alzheimer's disease (AD) is inconsistent, with some findings supporting spared priming while others do not. Several factors may explain these inconsistencies, including AD severity (e.g., dementia vs. Mild Cognitive Impairment; MCI) and priming paradigm-related characteristics. This systematic review and meta-analysis provides a quantitative summary of repetition priming in AD. We examined the between-group standard mean difference comparing repetition priming in AD dementia or amnestic MCI (aMCI; presumably due to AD) to controls. Thirty-two studies were selected, including 590 individuals with AD dementia, 267 individuals with amnestic MCI, and 703 controls. Our results indicated that both individuals with aMCI and AD dementia perform worse on repetition priming tasks than cognitively older adults. Paradigm-related moderators suggested that the effect size between studies comparing the combined aMCI or AD dementia group to cognitively healthy older adults was the highest for paradigms that required participants to produce, rather than identify, primes during the test phase. Our results further suggested that priming in AD is impaired for both conceptual and perceptual priming tasks. Lastly, while our results suggested that priming in AD is impaired for priming tasks that require deep processing, we were unable to draw firm conclusions about whether priming is less impaired in aMCI or AD dementia for paradigms that require shallow processing.

Contains fulltext : 222210.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access), The notion that procedural learning and memory is spared in Alzheimer's disease (AD) has important implications for interventions aiming to build on intact cognitive functions. However, despite these clinical implications, there are mixed findings in the literature about whether or not procedural learning remains intact. This meta-analysis examines the standard mean difference of all published studies regarding procedural learning in AD dementia or amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment (aMCI) compared to cognitively healthy older adults. Additionally, we conducted statistical equivalence analyses. Our systematic review showed that only a limited number of studies (k = 17) have compared procedural learning between individuals with aMCI or AD dementia and healthy controls. Our meta-analysis, which synthesized these studies, demonstrated that while procedural learning performance was not statistically equivalent between individuals with aMCI or AD dementia, and healthy older adults, the difference was clinically and statistically trivial. Although larger studies are needed, the present findings suggest that procedural learning does appear to remain spared in aMCI and AD dementia.

Contains fulltext : 208857.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), At a joint workshop organized by RIVM and BfR, international experts from governmental institutes, regulatory agencies, industry, academia and animal welfare organizations discussed and provided recommendations for the development, validation and implementation of innovative 3R approaches in regulatory toxicology. In particular, an evolutionary improvement of our current approach of test method validation in the context of defined approaches or integrated testing strategies was discussed together with a revolutionary approach based on a comprehensive description of the physiological responses of the human body to chemical exposure and the subsequent definition of relevant and predictive in vitro, in chemico or in silico methods. A more comprehensive evaluation of biological relevance, scientific validity and regulatory purpose of new test methods and assessment strategies together with case studies that provide practical experience with new approaches were discussed as essential steps to build up the necessary confidence to facilitate regulatory acceptance.

Contains fulltext : 208558.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access), INTRODUCTION: In women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) requiring pharmacotherapy, insulin was the established first-line treatment. More recently, oral glucose lowering drugs (OGLDs) have gained popularity as a patient-friendly, less expensive and safe alternative. Monotherapy with metformin or glibenclamide (glyburide) is incorporated in several international guidelines. In women who do not reach sufficient glucose control with OGLD monotherapy, usually insulin is added, either with or without continuation of OGLDs. No reliable data from clinical trials, however, are available on the effectiveness of a treatment strategy using all three agents, metformin, glibenclamide and insulin, in a stepwise approach, compared with insulin-only therapy for improving pregnancy outcomes. In this trial, we aim to assess the clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and patient experience of a stepwise combined OGLD treatment protocol, compared with conventional insulin-based therapy for GDM. METHODS: The SUGAR-DIP trial is an open-label, multicentre randomised controlled non-inferiority trial. Participants are women with GDM who do not reach target glycaemic control with modification of diet, between 16 and 34 weeks of gestation. Participants will be randomised to either treatment with OGLDs, starting with metformin and supplemented as needed with glibenclamide, or randomised to treatment with insulin. In women who do not reach target glycaemic control with combined metformin and glibenclamide, glibenclamide will be substituted with insulin, while continuing metformin. The primary outcome will be the incidence of large-for-gestational-age infants (birth weight >90th percentile). Secondary outcome measures are maternal diabetes-related endpoints, obstetric complications, neonatal complications and cost-effectiveness analysis. Outcomes will be analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Com

Item does not contain fulltext

Item does not contain fulltext, PURPOSE: To develop prognostic models and equations for predicting participation at six months after stroke. METHODS: This European prospective cohort study recruited 532 consecutive patients from four rehabilitation centers. Participation was assessed at six months after stroke with the Sickness Impact Profile (SIP), which consists of a physical, psychosocial and independent dimension. Twenty-six independent variables on admission to the rehabilitation center and 13 additional variables measured at two months post stroke were included in the analysis. A multiple logistic regression analysis was conducted predicting good participation (SIP < 20%). Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were calculated. RESULTS: The prognostic models for the three dimensions provided independent predictors containing demographics, complications, diagnostic, and disability measures. Sensitivity ranged from 64-84%, specificity 66-85%, positive predictive value 70-78%, and negative predictive value 76-87%. Barthel Index on admission, Euroqol Health State at two months and Caregiver Strain Index at two months were retained in all prediction models. CONCLUSIONS: A combination of variables was found in the prognostic models of the three dimensions of the SIP at six months after stroke. Already from the early beginning of stroke rehabilitation it seems important to focus on personal activities of daily living as well as caregivers' strain. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION: Prognostic factors predicting participation, measured by the three dimensions of the Sickness Impact Profile at six months post stroke include demographic variables, post-stroke complications, diagnostic parameters and disability measures. Significant prognostic variables for all three dimensions of the Sickness Impact Profile were a higher Barthel Index score on admission to the rehabilitation center, a higher Euroqol Health State score at two months post stroke and a lower Caregiver Strain Inde