Home › Research › Hippocampus size on brain scans
Hippocampal atrophy in recurrent major depression
Sheline YI, Wang PW, Gado MH, Csernansky JG, Vannier MW.. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 1996-04-01
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Hippocampal volumes of subjects with a history of major depressive episodes but currently in remission and with no known medical comorbidity were compared to matched normal controls by using volumetric magnetic resonance images. Subjects with a history of major depression had significantly smaller left and right hippocampal volumes with no differences in total cerebral volumes. The degree of hippocampal volume reduction correlated with total duration of major depression. In addition, large (diameter > or = 4.5 mm)-hippocampal low signal foci (LSF) were found within the hippocampus, and their number also correlated with the total number of days depressed. These results suggest that depression is associated with hippocampal atrophy, perhaps due to a progressive process mediated by glucocorticoid neurotoxicity.
Key findings
- Hippocampal volumes of subjects with a history of major depressive episodes but currently in remission and with no known medical comorbidity were compared to matched normal controls by using volumetric magnetic resonance images.
- Subjects with a history of major depression had significantly smaller left and right hippocampal volumes with no differences in total cerebral volumes.
- These results suggest that depression is associated with hippocampal atrophy, perhaps due to a progressive process mediated by glucocorticoid neurotoxicity.
Study details
- Effect sizeor = 4.5
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 40/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, 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 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 40 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America) |
| 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 | 1996 — 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 | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| 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 8632988) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 23 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 40 out of 100. |
| Total | 40 / 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
Sheline, Y. I., Wang, P. W., Gado, M. H., Csernansky, J. G., & Vannier, M. W. (1996). Hippocampal atrophy in recurrent major depression. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.93.9.3908
Vancouver
Sheline YI, Wang PW, Gado MH, Csernansky JG, Vannier MW. Hippocampal atrophy in recurrent major depression. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 1996. doi:10.1073/pnas.93.9.3908. PMID: 8632988.
BibTeX
@article{sheline1996-8632988,
author = {Sheline, Y. I. and Wang, P. W. and Gado, M. H. and Csernansky, J. G. and Vannier, M. W.},
title = {{Hippocampal atrophy in recurrent major depression}},
journal = {Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America},
year = {1996},
doi = {10.1073/pnas.93.9.3908},
pmid = {8632988},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.93.9.3908}
}