| Title |
Reserve-related activities and MRI metrics in multiple sclerosis patients and healthy controls: an observational study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Neurology, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12883-016-0624-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carolyn E. Schwartz, Michael G. Dwyer, Ralph Benedict, Bianca Weinstock-Guttman, Niels P. Bergsland, Jei Li, Murali Ramanathan, Robert Zivadinov |
| Abstract |
To examine whether past and current reserve-related activities make the brain less susceptible to MS pathology (i.e., lesions or disease-related atrophy). This secondary analysis of a cohort study included 276 healthy controls (HC), and 65 clinically isolated syndrome (CIS), 352 relapsing-remitting MS (RR) and 109 secondary- progressive MS (SPMS) patients. Past reserve-related activities comprised educational and occupational attainment. Current reserve-related activities comprised strenuous and non-strenuous activities. MRI was performed on 3 T scanner. Regression and non-parametric analysis examined relationships between MRI metrics and reserve-related activities. Multivariate models (HC as referent) revealed significant interactions in predicting strenuous reserve-related activities with chronic lesion burden (for CIS), brain- (for RR & SPMS), subcortical- (for CIS, RR, & SPMS) and amygdala- (for RR) volumes. Maximal Lifetime Brain Growth was higher for RR patients who engaged in running before and after diagnosis, rather than only before or never. Residual Brain Volume was higher in RR patients who did weights-exercise before and after diagnosis, as compared to only before. Reserve-related activities are related to brain health cross-sectionally in all MS subgroups, and longitudinally in RR patients. Consistent with reserve theory, RR patients who maintained strenuous activities had higher Maximal Lifetime Brain Growth and Residual Brain Volume. The study's limitations are discussed, including the potential for recall bias and design limitations that preclude causal inference. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 40% |
| Hungary | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 45 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 11% |
| Researcher | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 13% |
| Unknown | 19 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 24% |
| Neuroscience | 9 | 20% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 4% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 20 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 19 December 2016.
All research outputs
#1,526,641
of 22,881,154 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neurology
#119
of 2,440 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,785
of 363,105 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neurology
#3
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,881,154 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,440 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 363,105 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.