Time of Day Effects on Inhibitory Functioning: Cognitive and Neural Evidence of Sundowning in Amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI), a prodromal phase of Alzheimer's disease (AD), is characterized by episodic memory dysfunction, but inhibitory deficits have also been commonly reported. Time of day (TOD) effects have been confirmed in 1) healthy aging on cognitive processes such as inhibitory control, and 2) on behavior in AD (termed the sundowning effect), but no such research has addressed aMCI. OBJECTIVE: The present study examined the impact of TOD on the behavioral and electrophysiological correlates of inhibition in 54 individuals with aMCI and 52 healthy controls (HCs), all of morning chronotype. METHODS: Participants were randomly assigned to complete two inhibition tasks (Go-NoGo and Flanker) during their optimal (morning) or non-optimal (evening) TOD, while electroencephalography was recorded. RESULTS: Both tasks elicited changes in N2 and P3 event-related potential (ERP) components, which commonly index inhibitory functioning. Analyses showed that the Go-NoGo difference in P3 amplitude was reduced in individuals with aMCI relative to HCs. Compared to HCs, the Flanker difference in P3 amplitude was also reduced and coincided with more errors in the aMCI group. Notably, these behavioral and ERP differences were exaggerated in the non-optimal TOD relative to the optimal TOD. CONCLUSION: Findings confirm the presence of inhibition deficits in aMCI and provide novel evidence of sundowning effects on inhibitory control in aMCI. Results reinforce the need to consider the influences of TOD in clinical assessments involving individuals with aMCI.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".