↓ Skip to main content

Neurophysiological capacity in a working memory task differentiates dependent from nondependent heavy drinkers and controls

Overview of attention for article published in Drug & Alcohol Dependence, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Neurophysiological capacity in a working memory task differentiates dependent from nondependent heavy drinkers and controls
Published in
Drug & Alcohol Dependence, March 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2017.01.029
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael J. Wesley, Joshua A. Lile, Mark T. Fillmore, Linda J. Porrino

Abstract

Determining the neurobehavioral profiles that differentiate heavy drinkers who are and are not alcohol dependent will inform treatment efforts. Working memory is linked to substance use disorders and can serve as a representation of the demand placed on the neurophysiology associated with cognitive control. Behavior and brain activity (via fMRI) were recorded during an N-Back working memory task in controls (CTRL), nondependent heavy drinkers (A-ND) and dependent heavy drinkers (A-D). Typical and novel step-wise analyses examined profiles of working memory load and increasing task demand, respectively. Performance was significantly decreased in A-D during high working memory load (2-Back), compared to CTRL and A-ND. Analysis of brain activity during high load (0-Back vs. 2- Back) showed greater responses in the dorsal lateral and medial prefrontal cortices of A-D than CTRL, suggesting increased but failed compensation. The step-wise analysis revealed that the transition to Low Demand (0-Back to 1-Back) was associated with robust increases and decreases in cognitive control and default-mode brain regions, respectively, in A-D and A-ND but not CTRL. The transition to High Demand (1-Back to 2-Back) resulted in additional engagement of these networks in A-ND and CTRL, but not A-D. Heavy drinkers engaged working memory neural networks at lower demand than controls. As demand increased, nondependent heavy drinkers maintained control performance but relied on additional neurophysiological resources, and dependent heavy drinkers did not display further resource engagement and had poorer performance. These results support targeting these brain areas for treatment interventions.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 72 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Researcher 7 10%
Professor 3 4%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 23 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 24 33%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 11%
Neuroscience 6 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 27 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 March 2017.
All research outputs
#6,599,199
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Drug & Alcohol Dependence
#2,679
of 6,130 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,537
of 322,965 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug & Alcohol Dependence
#59
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,130 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 322,965 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.