Cited by 25Congenital Heart Disease StudiesNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesDevelopmental and Educational Neuropsychology

fMRI investigation of working memory in adolescents with surgically treated congenital heart disease

King, Tricia Z., Smith, Kristen M., Burns, Thomas G., Sun, Binjian, Shin, Jaemin, Jones, Richard A., Drossner, David, Mahle, William T.·2017·Applied Neuropsychology: Child

Abstract

Adolescents and young adults with surgically treated congenital heart disease (CHD) have been shown to exhibit difficulties with executive functions; however, the neural underpinnings of these impairments have not been previously examined with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). The current study employed fMRI to examine the neural mechanisms during a letter n-back task of working memory compared to vigilance. Seventeen participants with CHD (Mage = 17.76 ± 1.72 years; 88% Caucasian; 30% female; mean IQ = 104.12 ± 15.15) were compared to 17 controls (Mage = 18.40 ± 1.74 years; 70% Caucasian; 30% female; mean IQ = 110.59 ± 5.28) with similar declining performance as the n-back became more challenging. Overall, both groups activated similar frontal-parietal working-memory networks as seen in previous literature; however, some significant differences were detected between the groups. Specifically, the participants with CHD demonstrated differences within the left precuneus and the right inferior frontal gyrus. Secondary analyses indicated that this difference appeared to be due to less task-induced deactivation (TID) in the CHD group during working memory and greater working-memory TID in the control group. In CHD, prefrontal fMRI deactivation on working-memory tasks correlated with improved working-memory performance. Future complementary neuroimaging research with functional connectivity is warranted to further examine the neural underpinnings of disrupted executive function in the long-term outcomes of CHD.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/21622965.2015.1065185

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
King, T. Z., Smith, K. M., Burns, T. G., Sun, B., Shin, J., Jones, R. A., Drossner, D., & Mahle, W. T.
Affiliations
  • Georgia Institute of Technology (US)
  • Georgia State University (US)
  • Children's Healthcare of Atlanta (US)
  • Emory University (US)
Corresponding author
King, Tricia Z.
Venue
Applied Neuropsychology: Child
Published
2016-03-17
Volume
6
Issue
1
Pages
7-21
ISSN
  • 2162-2965 (ISSN-L)
  • 2162-2973
OpenAlex
W2320528219
Cited by
25
References
47
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2
FWCI
1.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Applied Neuropsychology Child (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Congenital Heart Disease Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
Keywords
congenital heart disease, working memory, adolescents, executive function, task-induced deactivation, precuneus, inferior frontal gyrus, frontoparietal network, sustained attention
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adolescent Behavior, Female, Heart Defects, Congenital, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Photic Stimulation, Psychomotor Performance, Cohort Studies, Treatment Outcome, Young Adult

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