Home › Research › Getting a diagnosis
Clinical application of the P3 component of event-related potentials. II. Dementia, depression and schizophrenia
Pfefferbaum A, Wenegrat BG, Ford JM, Roth WT, Kopell BS.. Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology, 1984-04-01
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Patients with dementia, schizophrenia and depression were tested with analogous auditory and visual event-related potential (ERP) paradigms designed to elicit a large P3. The patient groups were compared to age normative predictions derived from a large control sample for a number of ERP and behavioral variables. The results were similar for the auditory and visual paradigms. P3 latency was prolonged two or more S.D.s beyond that predicted by age for less than one-half of the demented patients. This latency prolongation was significant for the group as a whole but would result in too many false negatives if used diagnostically for individuals. Furthermore, increased P3 latency was not specific, as the schizophrenic patients also had later P3s. The amplitude of P3 was reduced in the demented patients, but it was also smaller in other patient groups. The only variable which distinguished the demented patients from both controls and from the other patients was the single trial P3 latency/RT correlation. The demented patients, as a group, had significantly lower P3 latency/RT correlations, but this effect also was not sensitive enough to be diagnostic for individuals. The data from these two paradigms suggest that the P3 amplitude and latency abnormalities observed reflect a common, rather than a diagnostically specific deficit. This study is in contrast to some others which report much more sensitivity and specificity in the use of P3 latency in the diagnosis of dementia. Differences in task demands, patient samples and ERP analysis techniques might explain some of the discrepancy.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Pfefferbaum, A., Wenegrat, B. G., Ford, J. M., Roth, W. T., & Kopell, B. S. (1984). Clinical application of the P3 component of event-related potentials. II. Dementia, depression and schizophrenia. Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-5597(84)90027-3
Vancouver
Pfefferbaum A, Wenegrat BG, Ford JM, Roth WT, Kopell BS. Clinical application of the P3 component of event-related potentials. II. Dementia, depression and schizophrenia. Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology. 1984. doi:10.1016/0168-5597(84)90027-3. PMID: 6200305.
BibTeX
@article{pfefferbaum1984-6200305,
author = {Pfefferbaum, A. and Wenegrat, B. G. and Ford, J. M. and Roth, W. T. and Kopell, B. S.},
title = {{Clinical application of the P3 component of event-related potentials. II. Dementia, depression and schizophrenia}},
journal = {Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology},
year = {1984},
doi = {10.1016/0168-5597(84)90027-3},
pmid = {6200305},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-5597(84)90027-3}
}
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.
Key findings
- The patient groups were compared to age normative predictions derived from a large control sample for a number of ERP and behavioral variables.
- The results were similar for the auditory and visual paradigms.
- This latency prolongation was significant for the group as a whole but would result in too many false negatives if used diagnostically for individuals.
- The demented patients, as a group, had significantly lower P3 latency/RT correlations, but this effect also was not sensitive enough to be diagnostic for individuals.
- The data from these two paradigms suggest that the P3 amplitude and latency abnormalities observed reflect a common, rather than a diagnostically specific deficit.
Why it matters
This study found that P3 brain-wave abnormalities in dementia were not specific and were not sensitive enough to diagnose individuals. It reports no diagnostic test reliable enough for individual use and does not address treatment, cure, or prevention.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Getting a diagnosis →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 45/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, so that was left out: it earned 43 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 45 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology) |
| 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 | 1984 — 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) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | 6 / 7 | Cited 575 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 3 / 5 | 13.1 citations a year over 44 year(s) since 1984 |
| Impact for its field and year | 5 / 6 | Cited 29.8× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 0 / 6 | No other study in this library cites it |
| Still being cited | 1 / 4 | Cited 3 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 2 / 4 | Last-listed author Bert S. Kopell: h-index 42 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 3 / 3 | Stanford University: institution h-index 2,684 (OpenAlex) |
| Multicenter collaboration | 2 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 4 institution(s) in 1 country |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 6200305) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 43 / 96 | Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 43 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 45 out of 100. |
| Total | 45 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
May need a subscription OpenAlex found no free copy of the full text (checked 6 Feb 1020), so the publisher may charge for it. The PubMed abstract is free.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.
Related studies in Getting a diagnosis
Also in Getting a diagnosis
141 studies in the library are filed under Getting a diagnosis with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Getting a diagnosis hub.