Cited by 279Multiple Sclerosis Research StudiesNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research

Relationship between frontal lobe lesions and Wisconsin Card Sorting Test performance in patients with multiple sclerosis

Arnett, P. A., Rao, S. M., Bernardin, L., Grafman, J., Yetkin, F. Z., Lobeck, L.·1994·Neurology

Abstract

Conceptual reasoning deficits are common in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) and are typically associated with focal lesions involving the frontal lobes. In this study, we predicted that MS patients with frontal white matter lesions (MS-F) would be more impaired on a standard conceptual reasoning task (Wisconsin Card Sorting Test; WCST) than patients with minimal frontal lesions (MS-NF), even if the total cerebral lesion area (TLA), measured from MRI, was equivalent across groups. We subdivided 43 definite MS patients into three groups based on MRI findings: seven in the MS-F group (mean TLA = 41.4 cm2) and seven in the MS-NF group (mean TLA = 50.0 cm2); 29 MS patients served as a low lesion burden control group (MS-C; mean TLA = 6.4 cm2). The groups did not differ with regard to demographic and illness characteristics. Although the three subgroups obtained comparable scores on a measure of global cognitive functioning (verbal intelligence), the MS-F group achieved significantly fewer categories and made more total errors on the WCST than did the MS-NF and MS-C groups. The MS-F group made significantly more perseverative responses than the MS-C group and nonsignificantly more than the MS-NF group. These results suggest that the pattern of cognitive decline in MS is a function of the location of demyelinating lesions within the cerebral hemispheric white matter. Finally, we supplement the group study results with a case report of an MS patient who was studied serially with MRI and cognitive testing.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1212/wnl.44.3_part_1.420

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?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Arnett, P. A., Rao, S. M., Bernardin, L., Grafman, J., Yetkin, F. Z., & Lobeck, L.
Affiliations
National Institutes of Health (US)
Venue
Neurology
Published
1994-03
Volume
44
Issue
3_part_1
Pages
420-420
ISSN
  • 0028-3878 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-632X
OpenAlex
W2041731350
Cited by
279
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 12
FWCI
8.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neurology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5k04ns001055-03, 5r01ns022128-07)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (K04 NS01055, NINDS R01 NS22128)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Multiple Sclerosis Research Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Keywords
multiple sclerosis, frontal lobe lesions, Wisconsin Card Sorting Test, conceptual reasoning, perseveration, white matter lesions, lesion localization, cognitive decline, demyelinating lesions, frontal lobe
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Cognition, Female, Frontal Lobe, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Multiple Sclerosis, Neuropsychological Tests

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