Cited by 42Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFace Recognition and PerceptionHistorical and Modern Theater Studies

Emotion recognition of morphed facial expressions in presymptomatic and symptomatic frontotemporal dementia, and Alzheimer’s dementia

Open access
Jiskoot, Lize C., Poos, Jackie M., Vollebergh, Manon E., Franzen, Sanne, van Hemmen, Judy, Papma, Janne M., van Swieten, John C., Kessels, Roy P. C. +1 more·2021·Journal of Neurology

Abstract

Background: The emotion recognition task (ERT) was developed to overcome shortcomings of static emotion recognition paradigms, by identifying more subtle deficits in emotion recognition across different intensity levels. In this study, we used the ERT to investigate emotion recognition deficits across the frontotemporal (FTD) and Alzheimer’s Dementia (AD) spectrum. Methods: With the ERT, we assessed the recognition of facial emotional expressions (anger-disgust-fear-happiness-sadness-surprise) across four intensities (40–60–80–100%) in patients with behavioural variant FTD (bvFTD; n = 32), and AD (n = 32), presymptomatic FTD mutation carriers (n = 47) and controls (n = 49). We examined group differences using multilevel linear regression with age, sex and education level as covariates, and performed post hoc analyses on presymptomatic (MAPT, GRN and C9orf72) mutation carriers. Classification abilities were investigated by means of logistic regression. Results: Lowest ERT total scores were found in patients with bvFTD and AD, whereas equal highest performance was found in presymptomatic mutation carriers and controls. For all emotions, significantly lower subscores were found in patients with bvFTD than in presymptomatic mutation carriers and in controls (highest p value = 0.025). Patients with bvFTD performed lower than patients with AD on anger (p = 0.005) and a trend towards significance was found for a lower performance on happiness (p = 0.065). Task performance increased with higher emotional intensity, and classification was better at the lowest than at the highest intensity. C9orf72 mutation carriers performed worse on recognizing anger at the lowest intensity than GRN mutation carriers (p = 0.047) and controls (p = 0.038). The ERT differentiated between patients with bvFTD and controls, and between patients with AD and controls (both p < 0.001). Discussion: Our results demonstrate emotion recognition deficits in both bvFTD and AD, and suggest the presence of subtle emotion recognition changes in presymptomatic C9orf72-FTD. This highlights the importance of incorporating emotion recognition paradigms into standard neuropsychological assessment for early differential diagnosis, and as clinical endpoints in upcoming therapeutic trials.

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 · 10.1007/s00415-020-10096-y

Cites

57 of 57 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?

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jiskoot, L. C., Poos, J. M., Vollebergh, M. E., Franzen, S., van Hemmen, J., Papma, J. M., van Swieten, J. C., Kessels, R. P. C., & van den Berg, E.
Affiliations
  • Erasmus MC (NL)
  • Leiden University Medical Center (NL)
  • Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
Corresponding author
Jiskoot, Lize C.
Venue
Journal of Neurology
Published
2020-07-29
Volume
268
Issue
1
Pages
102-113
ISSN
  • 0012-1037 (ISSN-L)
  • 0340-5354
  • 1432-1459
OpenAlex
W3045950748
Cited by
42
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 1
FWCI
2.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neurology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePub (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePub (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Stichting Dioraphte (09-02-00)
  • Association for Frontotemporal Degeneration (2009)
  • Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (HCMI 056-13-018)
  • ZonMw Memorabel (733050103 & 733050813)
  • Bluefield (-)
  • JPND PreFrontAls (733051042)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Historical and Modern Theater Studies
Keywords
emotion recognition, facial expressions, behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia, Alzheimer's disease, emotional intensity, neuropsychological assessment, clinical trial endpoints
MeSH terms
Alzheimer Disease, Emotions, Facial Expression, Humans, Recognition, Psychology, Frontotemporal Dementia

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