Cited by 117Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsCognitive Abilities and TestingDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research

Education mediates microstructural changes in bilateral hippocampus

Open access
Piras, Fabrizio, Cherubini, Andrea, Caltagirone, Carlo, Spalletta, Gianfranco·2011·Human Brain Mapping

Abstract

Education has been extensively considered an influential factor in the modulation of interindividual differences in cognitive performance and cerebral structure. Consequently, education has been linked to the concept of reserve, which refers to an unspecified aspect of brain structure or function that enables people with more education to cope better with brain pathology or age‐related changes. Nevertheless, the education‐related neural mechanisms involved in reserve are still not completely understood. In this study, 150 healthy subjects were submitted to a comprehensive sociodemographic, clinical and cognitive assessment, and a high‐resolution structural MRI and diffusion tensor imaging scan protocol. Data of micro‐ (mean diffusivity, MD) and macro‐ (volume) structural changes of six bilateral deep gray matter structures (thalamus, caudate nucleus, putamen, hippocampus, amygdala, and globus pallidus) were analyzed with reference to years of formal education. Results show that decreased MD in both left and right hippocampi was the only structural parameter that, along with decreasing age, significantly correlated with higher education. The present findings suggest that the hippocampal formation might be one site where education‐mediated microstructural changes occur, possibly compensating for cognitive decline. Hum Brain Mapp, 2011. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hbm.21018

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Proxy measures of reserve may engage different neural mechanisms, each important for a different aspect of reserve, such as neural capacity or neural efficiency.

    “In addition, it is likely that proxy measures of reserve may engage different neural mechanisms, each important for a different aspect reserve, such neural capacity (the total amount of neural resources available for cognition) or neural efficiency (using less neural resources—often operationalized as neural activity—to perform a cognitive task).54,56”

    From Maintenance, reserve and compensation: the cognitive neuroscience of healthy ageing (2018) · cites this paper as [56]

    The Introduction (page not specified) distinguishes reserve capacity in a threshold model from more efficient use of brain networks in an active model. It also identifies education as a reserve proxy, but does not say that different proxy measures engage different neural mechanisms or correspond to different aspects of reserve. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Genetic and environmental factors, including longer education, greater physical activity, demanding leisure activities, and bilingualism, affect individual differences in reserve.

    “Genetic55 and environmental factors,54,56 including longer education,32 greater physical activity,57 active participation in demanding leisure activities58 and bilingualism59,60 impact individual differences in reserve.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 48 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [12]12. First MB, Spitzer RL, Gibbon M, Williams JB (1997b): Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders (SCID-I), Clini- cian Version. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Piras, F., Cherubini, A., Caltagirone, C., & Spalletta, G.
Affiliations
  • Fondazione Santa Lucia (IT)
  • University of Rome Tor Vergata (IT)
Venue
Human Brain Mapping
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-01-13
Volume
32
Issue
2
Pages
282-289
ISSN
  • 1065-9471 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0193
OpenAlex
W1971429549
Cited by
117
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 8
FWCI
6.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Human Brain Mapping (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Ministero della Salute
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Keywords
education, hippocampus, brain reserve, white matter microstructure, mean diffusivity, deep gray matter, cognitive aging, cognitive decline, individual differences
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Educational Status, Female, Hippocampus, Humans, Functional Laterality, Male, Middle Aged, Neuronal Plasticity, Regression Analysis, Young Adult, Diffusion Tensor Imaging

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review