MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407261821 · doi:10.3389/fnagi.2025.1470747

Brain compensatory activation during Stroop task in patients with mild cognitive impairment: a functional near-infrared spectroscopy study

2025· article· en· W4407261821 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chenyu Fan, Hanfei Li, Ke Chen, Guohui Yang, Hongyu Xie, Haozheng Li, Yi Wu, Meng Li

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Aging Neuroscience · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsStroop effectFunctional near-infrared spectroscopyCognitive impairmentFunctional impairmentNeurosciencePsychologyCognitionFunctional connectivityAudiologyMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationClinical psychologyPrefrontal cortex

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This study investigated the disparities in brain activation patterns during the Stroop task among individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and those without any cognitive impairments (healthy controls, HCs) using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS). Methods We analyzed the cortical activation patterns of 73 patients with MCI and 63 HC individuals as they completed the Stroop task, employing fNIRS. The regions of interest (ROIs) included the dorsal prefrontal cortex (dPFC), ventrolateral prefrontal cortex (VLPFC), and parietal lobe (PL). The Stroop task is divided into early stage (0–15 s) and late stage (15–30 s). We also measured participants’ behavior during the Stroop task, analyzed variations in cortical activation intensity at different experiment stages, and performed correlation analysis between Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) scores, Stroop performance, and oxygenation levels. Results Our analysis revealed that individuals with MCI and HC demonstrated elevated cortical activation in the dPFC, VLPFC, and PL areas while performing the Stroop task ( q < 0.05, FDR-corrected). The MCI group displayed longer response latencies compared to the HC group while demonstrating comparable accuracy performance across both congruent and incongruent Stroop trials. The MCI group showed compensatory activation in the VLPFC, and PL regions compared to the HC group during the late stage of the Stroop task ( q < 0.05, FDR-corrected). Correlational analysis revealed a negative association between MoCA scores and oxygenation levels in the dPFC, VLPFC, and PL regions during the late stage of the Stroop task ( p < 0.05). However, no correlation was found with behavioral performance. Conclusion Mild cognitive impairment patients demonstrated effective compensation for their cognitive impairments at a partial behavioral level by engaging compensatory activation in the prefrontal, and parietal regions while performing the Stroop task.

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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.756

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations14
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Aging NeuroscienceSame topicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207