Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 158

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Visual contrast sensitivity in Alzheimer’s disease, mild cognitive impairment, and older adults with cognitive complaints

Open access
Risacher, Shannon L., WuDunn, Darrell, Pepin, Susan M., MaGee, Tamiko R., McDonald, Brenna C., Flashman, Laura A., Wishart, Heather A., Pixley, Heather S., Rabin, Laura A., Paré, Nadia, Englert, Jessica J., Schwartz, Eben, Curtain, Joshua R., West, John D., O’Neill, Darren P., Santulli, Robert B., Newman, Richard W., Saykin, Andrew J.·2013·Neurobiology of Aging

Abstract

Deficits in contrast sensitivity (CS) have been reported in Alzheimer’s disease (AD). However, the extent of these deficits in prodromal AD stages, including mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or even earlier, has not been investigated. In this study, CS was assessed using frequency doubling technology (FDT) in older adults with AD (n=10), amnestic MCI (n=28), cognitive complaints without performance deficits (CC, n=20), and healthy controls (HC, n=29). The association between CS and cognition was also evaluated. Finally, the accuracy of CS measures for classifying MCI versus HC was evaluated. CS deficits were found in AD and MCI, while CC showed intermediate performance between MCI and HC. Upper right visual field CS showed the most significant difference among groups. CS was also associated with cognitive performance. Finally, CS measures accurately classified MCI versus HC. The CS deficits in AD and MCI, and intermediate performance in CC, indicate that these measures are sensitive to early AD-associated changes. Therefore, FDT-based measures of CS may have promise as a novel AD biomarker.

Overview

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 · 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2012.08.007

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 158

Metadata

Authors
Risacher, S. L., WuDunn, D., Pepin, S. M., MaGee, T. R., McDonald, B. C., Flashman, L. A., Wishart, H. A., Pixley, H. S., Rabin, L. A., Paré, N., Englert, J. J., Schwartz, E., Curtain, J. R., West, J. D., O’Neill, D. P., Santulli, R. B., Newman, R. W., & Saykin, A. J.
Venue
Neurobiology of Aging
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-04
Volume
34
Issue
4
Pages
1133-1144
ISSN
0197-4580 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2076436215
Cited by
158
References
5
FWCI
4.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Visual contrast sensitivity in Alzheimer’s disease, mild cognitive impairment, and older adults with cognitive complaints. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2012.08.007
The paper
Risacher, S. L., WuDunn, D., Pepin, S. M., MaGee, T. R., McDonald, B. C., Flashman, L. A., Wishart, H. A., Pixley, H. S., Rabin, L. A., Paré, N., Englert, J. J., Schwartz, E., Curtain, J. R., West, J. D., O’Neill, D. P., Santulli, R. B., Newman, R. W., & Saykin, A. J. (2013). Visual contrast sensitivity in Alzheimer’s disease, mild cognitive impairment, and older adults with cognitive complaints. Neurobiology of Aging. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2012.08.007

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.