Home › Research › Risk factors
Central cholinergic systems and cognition
Everitt BJ, Robbins TW.. Annual review of psychology, 1997-01-01
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
The organization and possible functions of basal forebrain and pontine cholinergic systems are reviewed. Whereas the basal forebrain cholinergic neuronal projections likely subserve a common electrophysiological function, e.g. to boost signal-to-noise ratios in cortical target areas, this function has different effects on psychological processes dependent upon the neural network operations within these various cortical domains. Evidence is presented that (a) the nucleus basalis-neocortical cholinergic system contributes greatly to visual attentional function, but not to mnemonic processes per se; (b) the septohippocampal projection is involved in the modulation of short-term spatial (working) memory processes, perhaps by prolonging the neural representation of external stimuli within the hippocampus; and (c) the diagonal band-cingulate cortex cholinergic projection impacts on the ability to utilize response rules through conditional discrimination. We also suggest that nucleus basalis-amygdala cholinergic projections have a role in the retention of affective conditioning while brainstem cholinergic projections to the thalamus and midbrain dopamine neurons affect basic arousal processes (e.g. sleep-wake cycle) and behavioral activation, respectively. The possibilities and limitations of therapeutic interventions with procholinergic drugs in patients with Alzheimer's disease and other neurodegenerative disorders in which basal forebrain cholinergic neurons degenerate are also discussed.
Key findings
- We also suggest that nucleus basalis-amygdala cholinergic projections have a role in the retention of affective conditioning while brainstem cholinergic projections to the thalamus and midbrain dopamine neurons affect basic arousal processes (e.g. sleep-wake cycle) and behavioral activation, respectively.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Risk factors, ranked →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 36/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 36 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Annual review of psychology) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 1997 — older than 20 years, still counted |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 9046571) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 21 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 36 out of 100. |
| Total | 36 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Everitt, B. J., & Robbins, T. W. (1997). Central cholinergic systems and cognition. Annual review of psychology. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.48.1.649
Vancouver
Everitt BJ, Robbins TW. Central cholinergic systems and cognition. Annual review of psychology. 1997. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.48.1.649. PMID: 9046571.
BibTeX
@article{everitt1997-9046571,
author = {Everitt, B. J. and Robbins, T. W.},
title = {{Central cholinergic systems and cognition}},
journal = {Annual review of psychology},
year = {1997},
doi = {10.1146/annurev.psych.48.1.649},
pmid = {9046571},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.48.1.649}
}
Related studies in Risk factors
Also tagged “acetylcholinesterase”
234 studies in the library carry the topic tag “acetylcholinesterase”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 234 tagged studies.