↓ Skip to main content

Prefrontal Cortical Changes Following Cognitive Training in Patients with Chronic Schizophrenia: Effects of Practice, Generalization, and Specificity

Overview of attention for article published in Neuropsychopharmacology, April 2010
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
130 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
246 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
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
Prefrontal Cortical Changes Following Cognitive Training in Patients with Chronic Schizophrenia: Effects of Practice, Generalization, and Specificity
Published in
Neuropsychopharmacology, April 2010
DOI 10.1038/npp.2010.52
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kristen M Haut, Kelvin O Lim, Angus MacDonald

Abstract

Cognitive training is increasingly used in the treatment of schizophrenia, but it remains unknown how this training affects functional neuroanatomy. Practice on specific cognitive tasks generally leads to automaticity and decreased prefrontal cortical activity, yet broad-based cognitive training programs may avoid automaticity and increase prefrontal cortex (PFC) activity. This study used quasi-randomized, placebo-control design and pre/post neuroimaging to examine functional plasticity associated with attention and working memory-focused cognitive training in patients with schizophrenia. Twenty-one participants with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder split into two demographically and performance matched groups (nine scanned per group) and nine control participants were tested 6-8 weeks apart. Compared with both patient controls and healthy controls, patients receiving cognitive training increased activation significantly more in attention and working memory networks, including dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, anterior cingulate and frontopolar cortex. The extent to which activity increased in a subset of these regions predicted performance improvements. Although this study was not designed to speak to the efficacy of cognitive training as a treatment, it is the first study to show that such training can increase the ability of patients to activate the PFC regions subserving attention and working memory.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 246 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 2%
Australia 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Greece 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 235 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 53 22%
Researcher 32 13%
Student > Master 27 11%
Student > Bachelor 24 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 7%
Other 51 21%
Unknown 42 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 101 41%
Medicine and Dentistry 31 13%
Neuroscience 20 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 8%
Social Sciences 6 2%
Other 11 4%
Unknown 57 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 07 June 2012.
All research outputs
#20,944,189
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychopharmacology
#4,009
of 4,203 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#92,778
of 97,233 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychopharmacology
#21
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,203 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 97,233 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.