Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 296

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Default mode network connectivity in stable vs progressive mild cognitive impairment

Open access
Petrella, J.R., Sheldon, F.C., Prince, S.E., Calhoun, V.D., Doraiswamy, P.M.·2011·Neurology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Dysfunction of the default mode network (DMN) has been identified in prior cross-sectional fMRI studies of Alzheimer disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI); however, no studies have examined its utility in predicting future cognitive decline. METHODS: fMRI scans during a face-name memory task were acquired from a cohort of 68 subjects (25 normal control, 31 MCI, and 12 AD). Subjects with MCI were followed for 2.4 years (±0.8) to determine progression to AD. Maps of DMN connectivity were compared with a template DMN map constructed from elderly normal controls to obtain goodness-of-fit (GOF) indices of DMN expression. Indices were compared between groups and correlated with cognitive decline. RESULTS: GOF indices were highest in normal controls, intermediate in MCI, and lowest in AD (p < 0.0001). In a predictive model (that included baseline GOF indices, age, education, Mini-Mental State Examination score, and an index of DMN gray matter volume), the effect of GOF index on progression from MCI to dementia was significant. In MCI, baseline GOF indices were correlated with change from baseline in functional status (Clinical Dementia Rating-sum of boxes) (r = -0.40, p < 0.04). However, there was no additional predictive value for DMN connectivity when baseline delayed recall was included in the models. CONCLUSIONS: fMRI connectivity indices distinguish patients with MCI who undergo cognitive decline and conversion to AD from those who remain stable over a 2- to 3-year follow-up period. Our data support the notion of different functional brain connectivity endophenotypes for "early" vs "late" MCI, which are associated with different baseline memory scores and different rates of progression and conversion.

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 · 10.1212/wnl.0b013e31820af94e

Cites

34 of 34 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 34 references

Cited by

See all 296

Metadata

Authors
Petrella, J. R., Sheldon, F. C., Prince, S. E., Calhoun, V. D., & Doraiswamy, P. M.
Venue
Neurology
Published
2011-02-08
Volume
76
Issue
6
Pages
511-517
ISSN
  • 0028-3878 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-632X
OpenAlex
W2085032083
Cited by
296
References
34
FWCI
20.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Default mode network connectivity in stable vs progressive mild cognitive impairment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1212/wnl.0b013e31820af94e
The paper
Petrella, J. R., Sheldon, F. C., Prince, S. E., Calhoun, V. D., & Doraiswamy, P. M. (2011). Default mode network connectivity in stable vs progressive mild cognitive impairment. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0b013e31820af94e

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.