CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 360Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchSchizophrenia research and treatmentNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Apathy: why care?

van Reekum, Robert, Stuss, Donald T., Ostrander, Laurie·2005·The Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences
DOI 10.1176/jnp.17.1.7
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This review presents data showing that apathy is common across a number of disorders. Apathy is not only common, but is also associated with significant problems: reduced functional level, decreased response to treatment, poor illness outcome, caregiver distress, and chronicity. Preliminary evidence of treatment efficacy exists for dopaminergic drugs and for amphetamines. Strong evidence of efficacy exists for acetylcholinesterase inhibitors in Alzheimer's disease, and for atypical antipsychotics in schizophrenia. Frontal-subcortical system(s) dysfunction is implicated in the causation of apathy; apathy subtypes based on the various frontal-subcortical loops may thus exist. Further research involving diagnosis, pathophysiology, and treatment is suggested.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1176/jnp.17.1.7

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?

  • Limbic-frontal-subcortical circuits are frequently implicated in the pathophysiology of apathy in clinical populations.

    “Concerning apathy, it is the case that limbic-frontal-subcortical circuits are frequently implicated in the pathophysiology of this condition in clinical populations (van Reekum et al., 2005; Kos et al., 2016).”

    From The cingulum bundle: Anatomy, function, and dysfunction (2018) · cites this paper as van Reekum et al., 2005

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 113 · Cited by 360

Authors
van Reekum, R., Stuss, D. T., & Ostrander, L.
Affiliations
  • Received June 20, 2003; revised February 27, 2003; accepted March 13, 2002. From the Department of Psychiatry and Kunin-Lunenfeld Applied Research Unit, Baycrest Centre for Geriatric Care, and the Division of Geriatric Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario; the Rotman Research Institute, Baycrest Centre for Geriatric Care, and Departments of Medicine (Neurology, Rehabilitation Science) and Psychology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario; and the Department of Psychiatry, Baycrest Centre...
  • University of Toronto (CA)
ORCID
Stuss, Donald T.
Venue
The Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences
Publisher
American Psychiatric Association Publishing
Published
2005-02
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
7-19
ISSN
  • 0895-0172 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-7222
DOI
10.1176/jnp.17.1.7
OpenAlex
W2165387222
Cited by
360
References
113
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 20
FWCI
7.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Neuropsychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
apathy, functional disability, treatment response, disease outcome, caregiver distress, chronicity, dopaminergic therapy, amphetamine, acetylcholinesterase inhibitors, Alzheimer's disease, atypical antipsychotics, schizophrenia, pathophysiology, diagnosis
MeSH terms
Mental Disorders, Cognition Disorders, Empathy, Humans, Motivation

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