Present knowledge of attention and awareness centres on deficits in patients with right brain damage who show severe forms of inattention to the left, called spatial neglect. Yet the functions that are lost in neglect are poorly understood. In healthy people, they might produce “pseudoneglect”—subtle biases to the left found in various tests that could complement the leftward deficits in neglect. But pseudoneglect measures are poorly correlated. Thus, it is unclear whether they reflect anything but distinct surface features of the tests. To probe for a common mechanism, here we asked whether visual noise, known to increase leftward biases in the grating-scales task, has comparable effects on other measures of pseudoneglect. We measured biases using three perceptual tasks that require judgments about size (landmark task), luminance (greyscales task) and spatial frequency (grating-scales task), as well as two visual search tasks that permitted serial and parallel search or parallel search alone. In each task, we randomly selected pixels of the stimuli and set them to random luminance values, much like a poor TV signal. We found that participants biased their perceptual judgments more to the left with increasing levels of noise, regardless of task. Also, noise amplified the difference between long and short lines in the landmark task. In contrast, biases during visual searches were not influenced by noise. Our data provide crucial evidence that different measures of perceptual pseudoneglect, but not exploratory pseudoneglect, share a common mechanism. It can be speculated that this common mechanism feeds into specific, right-dominant processes of global awareness involved in the integration of visual information across the two hemispheres.
Background Obese and overweight body habitus are common among patients undergoing right heart catheterization for suspected pulmonary hypertension, but previous studies have described only patients with severe obesity. This study examined the effect of body habitus on intracardiac pressures, thermodilution cardiac output (TDCO), indirect Fick (iFick) cardiac output (CO), and pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) in subjects with normal cardiopulmonary hemodynamics. Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on healthy volunteers and patients referred for right heart catheterization for dyspnea of unknown origin with normal hemodynamics. Of the 65 subjects (53 ± 14 years; 51% female), 31% were normal weight, 49% were overweight, and 20% had obesity, as defined by a body mass index of 30-39.9 kg/m 2 . Mixed venous oxygen saturations and intracardiac pressures were compared across body mass index categories. Agreement between iFick CO calculated by 3 formulae, and TDCO and PVR was examined. Results No differences in intracardiac pressures were observed, but mixed venous oxygen saturations were lower in the obese group. iFick CO underestimated TDCO, particularly with the LaFarge formula, with a systematic difference of 0.33 L/min for every 1 L/min increase in CO. This difference was largest in the obese group—on average by 23% ± 10%, translating to an overestimation of PVR by 34% ± 16% on average. Conclusions In individuals without severe obesity, intracardiac pressures are not different, but mixed venous oxygen saturations are lower. Obesity confounds estimations of CO and PVR by iFick methods, which could result in inappropriate hemodynamic classification. These data can inform best practices in hemodynamic assessment of populations with obesity.
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.