Cited by 84Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsHistorical and Modern Theater Studies

Regional cerebral blood flow during the wisconsin card sorting test in normal subjects studied by xenon-133 dynamic SPECT: Comparison of absolute values, percent distribution values and covariance analysis

Marenco, Stefano, Coppola, Richard, Daniel, David G., Zigun, Jeffrey R., Weinberger, Daniel R.·1993·Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging

Abstract

We studied regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) by xenon-133 dynamic single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) in 17 normal volunteers who were performing the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST), a task that is particularly sensitive to disturbance of the prefrontal cortex, and a simple matching-to-sample task (BAR) as a sensorimotor control. Three methods for statistical analysis of regional "subtraction" data were used: absolute rCBF values, percent distribution values, and means adjusted for global CBF changes (covariance analysis). The absolute values had high variance, due to the combination of interindividual differences in global flow and intra-individual variation, and showed no statistically significant regional changes. This variation was greatly reduced by percent values and covariance analysis, which had quite similar outcomes. With both methods, significant increases of rCBF during the WCST as compared with the BAR were seen in the right anterior dorsolateral prefrontal and left occipital cortices, and reduction of rCBF in the left pararolandic region. Moreover, significant correlations with performance were found in the medial regions of the frontal lobes, with opposite trends for the right and left hemisphere. The posterior dorsolateral prefrontal region showed a negative correlation with sensory-motor frequency, an index related to the task's difficulty. These results are consistent with previous findings using other rCBF techniques and confirm the stat…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0925-4927(93)90029-h

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 33 · Cited by 84

Authors
Marenco, S., Coppola, R., Daniel, D. G., Zigun, J. R., & Weinberger, D. R.
Affiliations
  • National Institute of Mental Health (US)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
Corresponding author
Marenco, Stefano
Venue
Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1993-10
Volume
50
Issue
3
Pages
177-192
ISSN
0925-4927 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2088659780
Cited by
84
References
33
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
1.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychiatry Research Neuroimaging (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Historical and Modern Theater Studies
Keywords
regional cerebral blood flow, Wisconsin Card Sorting Test, covariance analysis, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, occipital cortex, parietal cortex, sensorimotor control, task difficulty, hemispheric lateralization, normal subjects
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain, Cerebrovascular Circulation, Female, Frontal Lobe, Humans, Functional Laterality, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Regional Blood Flow, Task Performance and Analysis, Tomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon

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