Home › Research › Mild cognitive impairment
MRI Asymmetry Index of Hippocampal Subfields Increases Through the Continuum From the Mild Cognitive Impairment to the Alzheimer's Disease
Sarica A, Vasta R, Novellino F, Vaccaro MG, Cerasa A, Quattrone A, Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative.. Frontiers in neuroscience, 2018-08-21
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
We found a general trend of increased degree of asymmetry with increasing severity of diagnosis. Indeed, AD presented the higher magnitude of asymmetry compared with HC, sMCI and pMCI, in the WH (AI mean 5.13 ± 4.29 SD) and in each of its twelve subfields. Moreover, we found in AD a significant negative correlation ( r = -0.33, p = 0.00065) between the AI of parasubiculum (mean 12.70 ± 9.59 SD) and the RAVLT Learning score (mean 1.70 ± 1.62 SD). Our findings showed that hippocampal subfields AI varies differently among the four groups HC, sMCI, pMCI, and AD. Moreover, we found-for the first time-that hippocampal substructures had different sub-patterns of lateralization compared with the whole hippocampus. Importantly, the severity in learning rate was correlated with pathological high degree of asymmetry in parasubiculum of AD patients.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Sarica, A., Vasta, R., Novellino, F., Vaccaro, M. G., Cerasa, A., Quattrone, A., et al. (2018). MRI Asymmetry Index of Hippocampal Subfields Increases Through the Continuum From the Mild Cognitive Impairment to the Alzheimer's Disease. Frontiers in neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2018.00576
Vancouver
Sarica A, Vasta R, Novellino F, Vaccaro MG, Cerasa A, Quattrone A, et al. MRI Asymmetry Index of Hippocampal Subfields Increases Through the Continuum From the Mild Cognitive Impairment to the Alzheimer's Disease. Frontiers in neuroscience. 2018. doi:10.3389/fnins.2018.00576. PMID: 30186103.
BibTeX
@article{sarica2018-30186103,
author = {Sarica, A. and Vasta, R. and Novellino, F. and Vaccaro, M. G. and Cerasa, A. and Quattrone, A. and {Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative}},
title = {{MRI Asymmetry Index of Hippocampal Subfields Increases Through the Continuum From the Mild Cognitive Impairment to the Alzheimer's Disease}},
journal = {Frontiers in neuroscience},
year = {2018},
doi = {10.3389/fnins.2018.00576},
pmid = {30186103},
url = {https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2018.00576}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- We found a general trend of increased degree of asymmetry with increasing severity of diagnosis.
- Indeed, AD presented the higher magnitude of asymmetry compared with HC, sMCI and pMCI, in the WH (AI mean 5.13 ± 4.29 SD) and in each of its twelve subfields.
- Moreover, we found in AD a significant negative correlation ( r = -0.33, p = 0.00065) between the AI of parasubiculum (mean 12.70 ± 9.59 SD) and the RAVLT Learning score (mean 1.70 ± 1.62 SD).
- Our findings showed that hippocampal subfields AI varies differently among the four groups HC, sMCI, pMCI, and AD.
- Moreover, we found-for the first time-that hippocampal substructures had different sub-patterns of lateralization compared with the whole hippocampus.
Why it matters
This imaging study found that asymmetry between the left and right hippocampus increased with severity of diagnosis from healthy controls through mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer's disease, and greater asymmetry in one subfield correlated with worse learning scores in Alzheimer's patients. These findings describe a possible marker of disease severity but do not test any treatment or show a way to prevent or cure the disease.
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 46/100
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 senior author's track record, so that was left out: it earned 44 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 46 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Frontiers in neuroscience) |
| Journal's citation record | 2 / 4 | Frontiers in Neuroscience: journal h-index 226 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| 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 | 2 / 5 | 2018 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here |
| 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 | 5 / 7 | Cited 119 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 3 / 5 | 11.9 citations a year over 10 year(s) since 2018 |
| Impact for its field and year | 3 / 6 | Cited 6.6× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 1 / 6 | Cited by 2 other studies in this library |
| Still being cited | 3 / 4 | Cited 51 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | 1 / 3 | National Research Council: institution h-index 840 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 2 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 4 institution(s) in 1 country |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 30186103) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 44 / 96 | Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 44 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 46 out of 100. |
| Total | 46 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
- DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2018.00576
- PubMed: 30186103
- Original source →
- Free full text: Frontiers in Neuroscience →
Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).
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.
Later studies that cite this one
2 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references.
Related studies in Mild cognitive impairment
Also tagged “disorder”
492 studies in the library carry the topic tag “disorder”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 492 tagged studies.