19.3 CAN WE IMPROVE RELATIONAL MEMORY IN SCHIZOPHRENIA AND IF SO, WHAT IS THE IMPACT ON NEURAL ACTIVITY?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Semantic information significantly contributes to the organization of relational memory. It is now well-established that people with schizophrenia do not spontaneously self-initiate strategies that use such semantic information to form relational memory. Multiple evidence suggests this deficit may relate in part with the contribution of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex to relational memory. For instance, in a previous functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study, we observed decreased brain activity in the left DLPFC in a group of participants with schizophrenia during a memory task involving elaborative semantic encoding. To remediate this selective memory deficit, we have developed a brief cognitive training for people with schizophrenia, named the Strategy for Semantic Association Memory (SESAME), which led to significant relational memory performance improvement. Here, we investigated the neural correlates underlying such memory improvements. Fifteen schizophrenia patients with deficits in self-initiation of semantic encoding strategies received two 60-minute SESAME training sessions. Memory performance and brain activity during a relational memory task were measured pre- and post- training using fMRI. In addition, we also investigated if structural preservation measured by the cortical thickness of the DLPFC as assessed prior to the intervention, predicted memory improvement post-training. SESAME memory training led to significant improvements in memory performance that were associated with increased activity in the left DLPFC, during a task in which patients had the opportunity to self-initiate semantic encoding strategies. Furthermore, patients with greater cortical reserve, as defined by cortical thickness measurement in the same left DLPFC area, significantly exhibited stronger memory improvement. Our findings provide evidence of neural malleability in the left DLPFC in schizophrenia using cognitive strategies training. Moreover, the brain-behavioral changes observed in schizophrenia provide hope that relational memory performance can be improved with a brief cognitive intervention. In the future, we aim to test the clinical efficacy of this training as part of a larger randomized controlled trial, and to develop complementary training focusing on other strategies (e.g. unitization) that could help improving relational memory in people with schizophrenia.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".