Back

Brain activation during the N-back working memory task in individuals with spinal cord injury: a functional near-infrared spectroscopy study

Chen, D. Y.; Di, X.; Amaya, N.; Sun, H.; Pal, S.; Biswal, B.

2024-02-12 neuroscience
10.1101/2024.02.09.579655 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Cognitive impairments have frequently been reported in individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) across different domains such as working memory, attention, and executive function. The mechanism of cognitive impairment after SCI is not well understood due to the heterogeneity of SCI sample populations, and may possibly be due to factors such as cardiovascular dysfunction, concomitant traumatic brain injury (TBI), hypoxia, sleep disorders, and body temperature dysregulation. In this study, we implement the Neuropsychiatric Unit Cognitive Assessment Tool (NUCOG) to assess cognitive differences between individuals with SCI and age-matched able-bodied (AB) controls. We then use an N-back working memory task and functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) to elucidate the neurovascular correlates of cognitive function in individuals with SCI. We observed significant differences between the SCI and AB groups on measures of executive function on the NUCOG test. On the N-back task, across the three levels of difficulty: 0-back, 2-back, and 3-back, no significant differences were observed between the SCI and AB group; however, both groups performed worse as the level of difficulty increased. Although there were no significant differences in N-back performance scores between the two groups, functional brain hemodynamic activity differences were observed between the SCI and AB groups, with the SCI group exhibiting higher maximum oxygenated hemoglobin concentration in the right inferior parietal lobe. These findings support the use of fNIRS to study cognitive function in individuals with SCI and may provide a useful tool during rehabilitation to obtain quantitative functional brain activity metrics.

Matching journals

The top 10 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.