Eyes-open and eyes-closed EEG of older adults with subjective cognitive impairment versus healthy controls: A frequency principal components analysis study.

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q3 NEUROSCIENCES
Adele E Cave, Frances M De Blasio, Dennis H Chang, Gerald W Münch, Genevieve Z Steiner-Lim
{"title":"Eyes-open and eyes-closed EEG of older adults with subjective cognitive impairment versus healthy controls: A frequency principal components analysis study.","authors":"Adele E Cave, Frances M De Blasio, Dennis H Chang, Gerald W Münch, Genevieve Z Steiner-Lim","doi":"10.1016/j.brainres.2024.149399","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Subjective Cognitive Impairment (SCI) is a self-perceived worsening of cognitive decline, carrying an increased risk of developing Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's Disease (AD). Due to the self-report nature of SCI, an understanding of the biological mechanisms that contribute to an increased dementia risk is needed. This study aims to assess the differences in resting state electroencephalography (EEG) (eyes-open, eyes-closed; EO, EC) between older adults with SCI and healthy controls (HCs) utilising frequency principal components analysis (fPCA), a novel data driven approach. Participants (n = 14 per group: SCI, HCs) were matched on age, sex, years of education, mood, cognition, and pre-morbid function. Continuous resting EEG was recorded during 2-minute conditions (EO, EC) and were submitted to 4 separate fPCAs (each condition, group). Corresponding components were assessed between groups and conditions, correlated with demographics, mood, and cognition variables; multivariate logistic regression was also carried out. Component amplitudes were larger in HCs for delta-theta and alpha-beta, while theta-alpha was larger for SCI. DASS anxiety scores contributed to higher amplitudes for HCs in EO delta-theta and alpha-beta, while male sex and depressive symptoms contributed to higher amplitudes for the SCI group in EO and EC theta-alpha. Findings demonstrate a distinct divergent signature of neurological activity in older people with SCI, despite normal objective cognitive function. This is the first fPCA study to investigate neuronal differences between HCs and older adults with SCI at rest. Novel confounders and effect modifiers were identified that should be controlled in future studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":9083,"journal":{"name":"Brain Research","volume":" ","pages":"149399"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brain Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2024.149399","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Subjective Cognitive Impairment (SCI) is a self-perceived worsening of cognitive decline, carrying an increased risk of developing Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's Disease (AD). Due to the self-report nature of SCI, an understanding of the biological mechanisms that contribute to an increased dementia risk is needed. This study aims to assess the differences in resting state electroencephalography (EEG) (eyes-open, eyes-closed; EO, EC) between older adults with SCI and healthy controls (HCs) utilising frequency principal components analysis (fPCA), a novel data driven approach. Participants (n = 14 per group: SCI, HCs) were matched on age, sex, years of education, mood, cognition, and pre-morbid function. Continuous resting EEG was recorded during 2-minute conditions (EO, EC) and were submitted to 4 separate fPCAs (each condition, group). Corresponding components were assessed between groups and conditions, correlated with demographics, mood, and cognition variables; multivariate logistic regression was also carried out. Component amplitudes were larger in HCs for delta-theta and alpha-beta, while theta-alpha was larger for SCI. DASS anxiety scores contributed to higher amplitudes for HCs in EO delta-theta and alpha-beta, while male sex and depressive symptoms contributed to higher amplitudes for the SCI group in EO and EC theta-alpha. Findings demonstrate a distinct divergent signature of neurological activity in older people with SCI, despite normal objective cognitive function. This is the first fPCA study to investigate neuronal differences between HCs and older adults with SCI at rest. Novel confounders and effect modifiers were identified that should be controlled in future studies.

主观认知障碍(SCI)是一种自我感觉的认知功能衰退,会增加患轻度认知障碍(MCI)和阿尔茨海默病(AD)的风险。由于 SCI 具有自我报告的性质,因此需要了解导致痴呆症风险增加的生物机制。本研究旨在利用频率主成分分析(fPCA)这一新型数据驱动方法,评估患有 SCI 的老年人与健康对照组(HCs)之间静息状态脑电图(EEG)(睁眼、闭眼;EO、EC)的差异。参与者(每组 14 人:SCI、HCs)的年龄、性别、受教育年限、情绪、认知和病前功能均匹配。在 2 分钟的条件下(EO、EC)记录连续静息脑电图,并提交给 4 个独立的 fPCAs(每个条件,每个组)。评估了不同组别和不同条件下的相应成分,并将其与人口统计学、情绪和认知变量相关联;还进行了多变量逻辑回归。在 HCs 中,delta-theta 和 alpha-beta 的成分振幅较大,而在 SCI 中,theta-alpha 的成分振幅较大。DASS焦虑评分使HC组在EO delta-theta和alpha-beta中的振幅更高,而男性性别和抑郁症状使SCI组在EO和EC theta-alpha中的振幅更高。研究结果表明,尽管客观认知功能正常,但患有 SCI 的老年人的神经活动具有明显的差异特征。这是第一项在静息状态下研究HC和SCI老年人神经元差异的fPCA研究。研究还发现了一些新的混杂因素和效应调节因子,应在今后的研究中加以控制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Brain Research
Brain Research 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
3.40%
发文量
268
审稿时长
47 days
期刊介绍: An international multidisciplinary journal devoted to fundamental research in the brain sciences. Brain Research publishes papers reporting interdisciplinary investigations of nervous system structure and function that are of general interest to the international community of neuroscientists. As is evident from the journals name, its scope is broad, ranging from cellular and molecular studies through systems neuroscience, cognition and disease. Invited reviews are also published; suggestions for and inquiries about potential reviews are welcomed. With the appearance of the final issue of the 2011 subscription, Vol. 67/1-2 (24 June 2011), Brain Research Reviews has ceased publication as a distinct journal separate from Brain Research. Review articles accepted for Brain Research are now published in that journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信