Premium
[P4–288]: FIRST OR LAST: DOES IT MATTER? UNCOVERING THE CLINICAL INFORMATION PRODUCED BY WORD LIST LEARNING AND RECALL TESTS
Author(s) -
ShapiraLichter Irit,
Scharff Irad,
Asvadurian Anita,
Keret Ophir,
BenHayun Rachel,
AharonPeretz Judith,
Steiner Israel,
Glik Amir
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
alzheimer's and dementia
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 6.713
H-Index - 118
eISSN - 1552-5279
pISSN - 1552-5260
DOI - 10.1016/j.jalz.2017.06.2157
Subject(s) - serial position effect , recall , psychology , free recall , word list , word (group theory) , audiology , neuropsychology , cognitive psychology , task (project management) , cognition , developmental psychology , medicine , artificial intelligence , psychiatry , linguistics , computer science , philosophy , management , economics , class (philosophy)
compare AD patients with and without confabulations. Methods: 37 healthy control (HC) and 35 individuals with mild to moderate AD were recruited at the Piti e-Salpêtri ere University Hospital. All participants were evaluated on Dalla Barba’s Confabulation Battery to determine their tendency to produce provoked confabulations. Thus, among AD patients, we distinguish between those who produced episodic confabulations, and those who didn’t. Accordingly 27 AD patients were considered free of confabulations (ADC-), and 8 as confabulators (ADC+) (none HC met the criteria). Then, all participants were assessed on a comprehensive neuropsychological battery which evaluate notably episodic memory, language, executive functioning and working memory. Participants also went through a structural MRI to determine whether ADCand ADC+ are similar. Results:Statistical analyses showed a significant difference between HC participants and the two groups of AD patients, in almost all cognitive domains assessed in our battery. However when comparing the two AD groups, they didn’t demonstrate distinct profiles. Regarding the neuroimaging data, and particularly hippocampal subfields volumes, the results showed the same pattern. Conclusions: In demonstrating that there is no cognitive differences between patients with and without confabulations, our results put in doubt some confabulation models supposing a unique and sufficient cognitive (e.g. executive) process underlying the onset of confabulations.