Back

Accelerated long-term forgetting as an objective marker of subjective memory impairment in multiple sclerosis

Jansen, C.; Stalter, J.; Reuter, S.; Witt, K.

2026-04-22 neurology
10.64898/2026.04.21.26351393 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundAccelerated long-term forgetting (ALF), defined as an increased rate of memory loss over extended intervals, has so far been detected in a pilot study of patients with mild multiple sclerosis (MS). This study aimed to (I) confirm the presence of ALF in a larger, heterogeneous MS sample, (II) explore associations with patient-reported outcomes, and (III) assess the diagnostic performance of ALF tests for subjective memory impairment. MethodsThis study compared 62 MS patients and 65 age-, sex-, and education-matched healthy controls using standardized memory tests (RAVLT, WMS-IV Logical Memory subtest). Recall was assessed immediately, after 30 minutes, and after 7 days. Seven-day/30-minute recall ratios (QRAVLT, QWMS) served as primary outcomes. Self-report measures included memory complaints, fatigue, depression, and sleep disturbances. Linear regression and Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses assessed predictors and diagnostic accuracy. ResultsALF was observed in multiple sclerosis since QRAVLT was lower in patients than in controls (0.64 [95% CI 0.59-0.69] vs. 0.78 [0.73-0.82], p < 0.001), as was QWMS (0.79 [95% CI 0.74-0.84] vs. 0.95 [0.90-1.00], p < 0.001), despite comparable initial learning. Greater fatigue, higher memory complaints, longer disease duration, older age, and greater disability were associated with lower ALF scores. The combined ALF score moderately discriminated subjective memory impairment (AUC 0.74; sensitivity 0.73; specificity 0.73). ConclusionMS patients showed ALF despite normal initial learning, indicating a specific memory deficit undetected by standard tests. Long-delay recall using RAVLT and WMS-IV Logical Memory subtest may improve cognitive impairment detection in MS.

Matching journals

The top 2 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.