MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2609250802 · doi:10.1093/sleepj/zsx050.273

0274 NON-VISUAL EFFECT OF LIGHT ON COGNITIVE BRAIN FUNCTION: AGE AND IMPACT OF LENS YELLOWING

2017· article· en· W2609250802 on OpenAlexaff
Véronique Daneault, Marie Dumont, Éric Massé, Pierre Forcier, Julien Doyon, Gilles Vandewalle, Julie Carrier

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Sleep & Circadian NetworkHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de MontréalUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFunctional magnetic resonance imagingAudiologyPsychologyOccipital lobeCognitionDarknessOphthalmologyNeuroimagingEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performanceAlertnessMedicineNeuroscienceOpticsPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Light, particularly blue light, increases alertness, performance and cognitive brain responses, but age-related decrease in the effects of light has been reported. The extent to which these age-related modifications are caused by changes at the level of the eye (because of senile miosis and lens yellowing) or the brain is unclear. We conducted a neuroimaging protocol including 14 younger (20-30y), 12 older (60-80y) and 12 matched older healthy individuals with intraocular lens replacement after cataract surgery (IOL subjects), i.e. they differed from the healthy older group only in terms lens light absorption. Subjects completed two functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) acquisitions while performing a working memory 2-back task (2b) and a simple letter detection “0-back” task (0b), once under blue monochromatic light (B) (480nm, 3x1013ph/cm2/s) and once under orange monochromatic light (O) (620nm, 3x1013ph/cm2/s). Each fMRI session was conterbalned and also included blocks of n-back task in darkness, as well as blocks of light alone (B, O). First, all blue blocks were contrast against blocks completed in darkness [(2bB+0bB+B)-(2bD+0bD)]. Results revealed common group effects with greater brain activations in lateral geniculate nucleus, lingual, calcarine sulcus and median occipital gyrus under blue light exposure (P corrected < 0.05). As a second step, in order to estimate non-visual impact of light, we computed the effect of blue versus orange light on cognitive brain responses [(2bB-0bB)-(2bO-0bO)]. Results revealed a main effect of group (P corrected < 0.05) with group differences in various regions including the cingulate cortex, median prefrontal cortex and hippocampus. Young subjects showed greater brain sensitivity to light as compared to IOL and older individuals. No significant differences were found between IOL and older with their natural endogenous lens. Our results confirm that the aging brain is still sensitive to blue light. However, both older groups showed reduced non-visual effects of light on cognitive brain responses as compared to the young. These results suggest that cerebral modifications, not the lens, underlie age-related reduced non-visual impact of light on cognitive brain responses. CIHR.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.347

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.359 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment StudiesFrench-language works237,207