↓ Skip to main content

Longitudinal Assessment of Verbal Learning and Memory in Amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment: Practice Effects and Meaningful Changes

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Readers on

mendeley
35 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
Longitudinal Assessment of Verbal Learning and Memory in Amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment: Practice Effects and Meaningful Changes
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, July 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01231
Pubmed ID
Authors

María Campos-Magdaleno, David Facal, Cristina Lojo-Seoane, Arturo X. Pereiro, Onésimo Juncos-Rabadán

Abstract

Objectives: To identify learning effects and meaningful changes in amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) at a follow-up assessment. Method: The Spanish version of the California Verbal Learning Test (CVLT) was administered to a sample of 274 adults of age over 50 years with subjective memory complains (SMC), including single and multiple domain aMCI groups and participants with SMC but without cognitive impairment (SMC group). The Wilcoxon test was used to compare results at baseline and after 18 months in short and long recall, and standardized regression-based (SRB) methods were used to study meaningful changes. Results: Scores were significantly higher at follow-up for short and long-delayed recall in all groups indicating generalized practice effect. SRB scores indicated a significant decline in recall in a higher proportion of participants with aMCI than in SMC group. Discussion: Patients with multiple and single domain aMCI benefit from practice in a verbal learning memory test. The SRB approach revealed a higher incidence of meaningful decline in short and long-delay recall and recognition in the aMCI groups than in the SMC group. Specifically, compared to SMC participants, single-domain aMCI individuals declined in a higher proportion in all measures, and multiple-domain aMCI individuals in long delay free recall.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 11%
Professor 3 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 12 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 12 34%
Neuroscience 4 11%
Linguistics 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Mathematics 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 13 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 20 July 2017.
All research outputs
#13,561,111
of 22,986,950 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#13,470
of 30,181 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,842
of 315,213 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#325
of 560 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,986,950 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,181 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 315,213 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 560 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.