Background Screening clinical breast examination (cbe) is controversial; the use of cbe is declining not only as a
Background Posttraumatic stress disorder is a debilitating psychiatric disorder characterized by symptoms of intrusive re-experiencing of trauma, avoidance and hyper-arousal. Diagnosis and treatment of PTSD is further complicated by concurrently occurring disorders, the most frequent being major depressive disorder and anxiety disorders. Previous research highlights that attentional processing in posttraumatic stress disorder is associated with substantial interference by emotional stimuli, a phenomenon also observed in these concurrently occurring psychiatric disorders. However, the diagnosis-relevance of this interference remains elusive. Here, we investigated the emotional Stroop interference for diagnosis-related stimuli, generally negative stimuli, and generally positive stimuli in posttraumatic stress disorder, major depressive disorder and anxiety disorders. Methods We performed a systematic database search in PubMed (Medline), Cochrane Library and PsycINFO on emotional Stroop performance in individuals with a diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder, major depressive disorder or anxiety disorders separately. Mean effect sizes, standard errors and confidence intervals were estimated for each clinical group and healthy control group comparison using random effect models. Results As compared to healthy control group, the posttraumatic stress disorder group displayed greater interference by diagnosis-related stimuli and positive stimuli but not for generally negative stimuli. The major depressive disorder and anxiety disorders groups showed greater interference by diagnosis-related and negative stimuli, but not by positive stimuli. The age and sex had no significant impact on interference. Conclusions These findings highlight the importance of diagnosis-relevant information on attentional processing in all three clinical populations, posttraumatic stress disorder, major depressive disorder and anxiety disorders. Further, the impact of generally negative stimuli but not generally positive stimuli in major depressive disorder and anxiety disorders indicate impaired attentional bias for mood-congruent stimuli but not for general stimuli. Finally, it remains to be studied whether the influence of generally positive stimuli in posttraumatic stress disorder indicate that positive stimuli are perceived as PTSD related.
Semantic deficits are common in individuals with Alzheimer’s disease (AD). These deficits notably impact the ability to understand words. In healthy aging, semantic knowledge increases but semantic processing (i.e., the ability to use this knowledge) may be impaired. This systematic review aimed to investigate semantic processing in healthy aging and AD through behavioral responses and the N400 brain event-related potential. The results of the quantitative and qualitative analyses suggested an overall decrease in accuracy and increase in response times in healthy elderly as compared to young adults, as well as in individuals with AD as compared to age-matched controls. The influence of semantic association, as measured by N400 effect amplitudes, appears smaller in healthy aging and even more so in AD patients. Thus, semantic processing differences may occur in both healthy and pathological aging. The establishment of norms of healthy aging for these outcomes that vary between normal and pathological aging could eventually help early detection of AD.
The anterior temporal lobes (ATLs) have been consistently associated with semantic processing which, in turn, has a key role in reading aloud single words. This study aimed to investigate (1) the reading abilities in patients with the semantic variant of primary progressive aphasia (svPPA), and (2) the relationship between gray matter (GM) volume of the left ATL and word reading performance using voxel-based morphometry (VBM). Three groups of participants (svPPA, Alzheimer’s Disease, AD and healthy elderly adults) performed a reading task with exception words, regular words and pseudowords, along with a structural magnetic resonance imaging scan. For exception words, the svPPA group had a lower accuracy and a greater number of regularization errors as compared to the control groups of healthy participants and AD patients. Similarly, for regular words, svPPA patients had a lower accuracy in comparison with AD patients, and a greater number of errors related to complex orthography-to-phonology mappings (OPM) in comparison to both control groups. VBM analyses revealed that GM volume of the left ATL was associated with the number of regularization errors. Also, GM volume of the left lateral ATL was associated with the number of errors with complex OPM during regular word reading. Our results suggest that the left ATL might play a role in the reading of exception words, in accordance with its role in semantic processing. Results further support the involvement of the left lateral ATL in combinatorial processes, including the integration of semantic and phonological information, for both exception and regular words.
BackgroundIndividuals with affective‐prosodic deficits have difficulty understanding or expressing emotions and attitudes through prosody. Affective prosody disorders can occur in multiple neurological conditions, but the limited knowledge about the clinical groups prone to deficits complicates their identification in clinical settings. Additionally, the nature of the disturbance underlying affective prosody disorder observed in different neurological conditions remains poorly understood.AimsTo bridge these knowledge gaps and provide relevant information to speech‐language pathologists for the management of affective prosody disorders, this study provides an overview of research findings on affective‐prosodic deficits in adults with neurological conditions by answering two questions: (1) Which clinical groups present with acquired affective prosodic impairments following brain damage? (2) Which aspects of affective prosody comprehension and production are negatively affected in these neurological conditions?Methods & ProceduresWe conducted a scoping review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. A literature search was undertaken in five electronic databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL and Linguistics, and Language Behavior Abstracts) to identify primary studies reporting affective prosody disorders in adults with neurological impairments. We extracted data on clinical groups and characterised their deficits based on the assessment task used.Outcomes & ResultsThe review of 98 studies identified affective‐prosodic deficits in 17 neurological conditions. The task paradigms typically used in affective prosody research (discrimination, recognition, cross‐modal integration, production on request, imitation and spontaneous production) do not target the processes underlying affective prosody comprehension and production. Therefore, based on the current state of knowledge, it is not possible to establish the level of processing at which impairment occurs in clinical groups. Nevertheless, deficits in the comprehension of affective prosody are observed in 14 clinical groups (mainly recognition deficits) and deficits in the production of affective prosody (either on request or spontaneously) in 10 clinical groups. Neurological conditions and types of deficits that have not been investigated in many studies are highlighted.Conclusions & ImplicationsThe aim of this scoping review was to provide an overview on acquired affective prosody disorders and to identify gaps in knowledge that warrant further investigation. Deficits in the comprehension or production of affective prosody are common to numerous clinical groups with various neurological conditions. However, the underlying cause of affective prosody disorders across them is still unknown. Future studies should implement standardised assessment methods with specific tasks based on a cognitive model to identify the underlying deficits of affective prosody disorders.WHAT THIS PAPER ADDSWhat is already known on the subject What is already known on the subjectAffective prosody is used to share emotions and attitudes through speech and plays a fundamental role in communication and social interactions. Affective prosody disorders can occur in various neurological conditions, but the limited knowledge about the clinical groups prone to affective‐prosodic deficits and about the characteristics of different phenotypes of affective prosody disorders complicates their identification in clinical settings. Distinct abilities underlying the comprehension and production of affective prosody can be selectively impaired by brain damage, but the nature of the disturbance underlying affective prosody disorders in different neurological conditions remains unclear.What this study adds Affective‐prosodic deficits are reported in 17 neurological conditions, despite being recognised as a core feature of the clinical profile in only a few of them. The assessment tasks typically used in affective prosody research do not provide accurate information about the specific neurocognitive processes impaired in the comprehension or production of affective prosody. Future studies should implement assessment methods based on a cognitive approach to identify underlying deficits. The assessment of cognitive/executive dysfunctions, motor speech impairment and aphasia might be important for distinguishing primary affective prosodic dysfunctions from those secondarily impacting affective prosody.What are the potential clinical implications of this study? Raising awareness about the possible presence of affective‐prosodic disorders in numerous clinical groups will facilitate their recognition by speech‐language pathologists and, consequently, their management in clinical settings. A comprehensive assessment covering multiple affective‐prosodic skills could highlight specific aspects of affective prosody that warrant clinical intervention.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.