Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
Diminished curiosity in patients with probable Alzheimer's disease as measured by exploratory eye movements
Daffner KR, Scinto LF, Weintraub S, Guinessey JE, Mesulam MM.. Neurology, 1992-02-01
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Clinical accounts of Alzheimer's disease (AD) suggest that some patients exhibit markedly diminished curiosity and initiative early in the course of their illness. Such behavioral changes are extremely difficult to measure experimentally. We studied one aspect of curiosity by measuring exploratory eye movements in response to provocative visual stimuli in 12 patients with probable AD and 10 matched controls. Subjects viewed slides, each of which contained an incongruous or irregular figure paired with a congruous or regular one. Unlike controls, who spent significantly more time viewing the incongruous stimuli, AD patients distributed their viewing time equally and spent significantly less time than controls looking at the novel stimuli. Additionally, when presented with picture slides containing an unexpected element, AD patients exhibited diminished visual exploration overall and decreased attention to the incongruous part. Further analyses suggest that the results cannot be adequately explained by a general decline in cognition or by problems with ocular motility or directing visual attention. We conclude that AD patients exhibit diminished curiosity which can be measured by the study of exploratory eye movements.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Daffner, K. R., Scinto, L. F., Weintraub, S., Guinessey, J. E., & Mesulam, M. M. (1992). Diminished curiosity in patients with probable Alzheimer's disease as measured by exploratory eye movements. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.42.2.320
Vancouver
Daffner KR, Scinto LF, Weintraub S, Guinessey JE, Mesulam MM. Diminished curiosity in patients with probable Alzheimer's disease as measured by exploratory eye movements. Neurology. 1992. doi:10.1212/wnl.42.2.320. PMID: 1736159.
BibTeX
@article{daffner1992-1736159,
author = {Daffner, K. R. and Scinto, L. F. and Weintraub, S. and Guinessey, J. E. and Mesulam, M. M.},
title = {{Diminished curiosity in patients with probable Alzheimer's disease as measured by exploratory eye movements}},
journal = {Neurology},
year = {1992},
doi = {10.1212/wnl.42.2.320},
pmid = {1736159},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.42.2.320}
}
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
- Clinical accounts of Alzheimer's disease (AD) suggest that some patients exhibit markedly diminished curiosity and initiative early in the course of their illness.
- Unlike controls, who spent significantly more time viewing the incongruous stimuli, AD patients distributed their viewing time equally and spent significantly less time than controls looking at the novel stimuli.
- Additionally, when presented with picture slides containing an unexpected element, AD patients exhibited diminished visual exploration overall and decreased attention to the incongruous part.
- Further analyses suggest that the results cannot be adequately explained by a general decline in cognition or by problems with ocular motility or directing visual attention.
- We conclude that AD patients exhibit diminished curiosity which can be measured by the study of exploratory eye movements.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Participants12
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 47/100
Published in a leading specialty journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported 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 27 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 47 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Neurology) |
| 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 | 1992 — older than 20 years, still counted |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 12 participants |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| 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 1736159) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 27 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 27 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 47 out of 100. |
| Total | 47 / 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.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.