Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Brain scans and imaging

Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment

Subjective cognitive decline (SCD), as expressed by older adults, is associated with negative affect, which, in turn, is a likely risk factor for Alzheimer's Disease (AD). This study assessed the associations between negative affective burden, cognitive functioning, and functional connectivity in networks vulnerable to AD in the context of SCD. Older participants (60-90 years) with SCD (n = 51) and healthy controls (n = 50) were investigated in a cross-sectional study. Subclinical negative affective burden, quantified through a composite of self-reported negative affective factors, was related to cognitive functioning (self-perceived and objective) and functional connectivity. Seed-to-voxel analyses were carried out in default mode network (DMN) and salience network (SAL) nodes using resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging. Greater negative affective burden was associated with lower self-perceived cognitive functioning and lower between-network functional connectivity of DMN and SAL nodes in the total sample. In addition, there was a significant moderation of SCD status. Greater negative affective burden related to higher functional connectivity within DMN (posterior cingulate-to-precuneus) and within SAL (anterior cingulate-to-insula) nodes in the SCD group, whereas in controls the inverse association was found. We show that negative affective burden is associated with functional brain alterations in older adults, regardless of SCD status. Specifically in the SCD phenotype, greater negative affective burden relates to higher functional connectivity within brain networks vulnerable to AD. Our findings imply that negative affective burden should be considered a potentially modifiable target for early intervention.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 55/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 4 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 3 of 5; Sample size 1 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read left out, no data. 31 of the 56 points it could be judged on, which is 55 of 100. Total 55 of 100.31 of the 56 points we could judge = 55 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a snapshot of people at one point in time. Scored zero for 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, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 31 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 55 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Scientific reports)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 4 / 12 A snapshot of people at one point in time
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 3 / 5 2022 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 1 / 4 51 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 35418579)
Free to read — / 2 Access not recorded — left out of this score
Points 31 / 56 Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 31 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 55 out of 100.
Total 55 / 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. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Schwarz, C., Benson, G. S., Antonenko, D., Horn, N., Köbe, T., Klimecki, O., et al. (2022). Negative affective burden is associated with higher resting-state functional connectivity in subjective cognitive decline. Scientific reports. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-10179-y

Vancouver

Schwarz C, Benson GS, Antonenko D, Horn N, Köbe T, Klimecki O, et al. Negative affective burden is associated with higher resting-state functional connectivity in subjective cognitive decline. Scientific reports. 2022. doi:10.1038/s41598-022-10179-y. PMID: 35418579.

BibTeX

@article{schwarz2022-35418579,
  author  = {Schwarz, Claudia and Benson, Gloria S and Antonenko, Daria and Horn, Nora and Köbe, Theresa and Klimecki, Olga and Sommer, Werner and Wirth, Miranka and others},
  title   = {{Negative affective burden is associated with higher resting-state functional connectivity in subjective cognitive decline}},
  journal = {Scientific reports},
  year    = {2022},
  doi     = {10.1038/s41598-022-10179-y},
  pmid    = {35418579},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-10179-y}
}

Related studies in Brain scans and imaging

Similar studies

More on Brain scans and imaging

See all studies in Brain scans and imaging →