Neurocognitive outcomes and memory transfer in heart transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Cardiac transplantation remains a life-saving intervention for end-stage cardiac disease, substantially improving survival and quality of life. While physiological and immunological challenges, such as graft rejection and immunosuppression, are well-characterized, emerging evidence underscores complex neurocognitive and psychological transformations in recipients. These include debated phenomena such as shifts in memory, behavior, and personality, which challenge conventional paradigms of transplantation outcomes. METHODOLOGY: This scoping review was conducted by performing comprehensive literature searches of databases including PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO using MeSH keywords: "heart transplant", "neurocognitive outcomes", "cellular memory", AND "personality transfer". The timeline spanned 1990 through June 2025. INCLUSION CRITERIA: (1) peer-reviewed clinical studies; (2) case reports providing detailed narrative descriptions relevant to memory/personality changes; (3) manuscripts written in English; (4) reports including ≥5 participants/patients. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: (1) non-transplant cardiac studies; (2) animal research; (3) editorials/opinions/gray literature; (4) non-English manuscripts. Study quality was assessed through manual review of documented accounts alongside corresponding peer-reviewed manuscripts. RESULTS: This review synthesizes theories, case studies, and mechanistic hypotheses from published reports, exploring neurocognitive trajectories and purported memory-behavioral transfer between donors and recipients. Epigenetic modifications-such as DNA methylation and histone remodeling-are hypothesized to alter gene expression in donor-derived cells, potentially influencing recipient cognition and behavior. Concurrently, immune-brain crosstalk, mediated by cytokines and neuroinflammatory pathways, may exacerbate psychological distress, including identity dissonance and anxiety. Cognitive-behavioral interventions and psychosocial support emerge as critical tools for post-transplant adaptation. CONCLUSION: Current evidence on memory transfer remains inconclusive, yet its implications for biological-psychological interconnectedness warrant rigorous interdisciplinary inquiry. By integrating neuroscientific, immunological, and psychological frameworks, future research can elucidate the mechanisms underlying post-transplant neurocognitive phenomena, optimizing therapeutic strategies and patient counseling.
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 | 0.009 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".