MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890454034 · doi:10.1002/agm2.12037

Functional <scp>MRI</scp> on executive functioning in aging and dementia: A scoping review of cognitive tasks

2018· review· en· W2890454034 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew McDonald, Ryan C.N. D’Arcy, Xiaowei Song

Bibliographic record

VenueAging Medicine · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityFraser HealthUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive flexibilityHuman multitaskingExecutive functionsPsychologyCognitive psychologyWorking memoryCognitionTask switchingFunctional magnetic resonance imagingNeuropsychologyTask (project management)Stroop effectDementiaElementary cognitive taskCognitive neuropsychologyCognitive neuroscienceNeuroscienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cognitive decline with aging and dementia is especially poignant with regard to the executive functioning that is necessary for activities of daily independent living. The relationship between age-related neurodegeneration in the prefrontal cortex and executive functioning has been uniquely investigated using task-phase functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to detect brain activity in response to stimuli; however, a comprehensive list of task designs that have been implemented to task-phase fMRI is absent in the literature. The purpose of this review was to recognize what methods have been used to study executive functions with aging and dementia in fMRI tasks, and to describe and categorize them. The following cognitive subdomains were emphasized: cognitive flexibility, planning and decision-making, working memory, cognitive control/inhibition, semantic processing, attention and concentration, emotional functioning, and multitasking. Over 30 different task-phase fMRI designs were found to have been implemented in the literature, all adopted from standard neuropsychological assessments. Cognitive set-shifting and decision-making tasks were particularly well studied in regard to age-related neurodegeneration, while emotional functioning and multitasking designs were found to be the least utilized. Summarizing the information on which tasks have shown the greatest usability will assist in the future design and implementation of effective fMRI experiments targeting executive functioning.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0090.009
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations30
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAging MedicineSame topicFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesFrench-language works237,207