Prosaccade and Antisaccade Paradigms in Persons with Alzheimer’s Disease: A Meta-Analytic Review
- 148 Downloads
Persons with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) are at high Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) risk but the development of sensitive measures to assess subtle cognitive decline in this population poses a major challenge for clinicians and researchers. Eye movement monitoring is a non-invasive, sensitive way to assess subtle cognitive processes in clinical populations. We conducted a critical review and a meta-analysis of the literature on pro and antisaccade paradigm in AD/MCI. The meta-analysis included 20 studies, all of which used the prosaccade paradigm and 13 of which studied the antisaccade paradigm as well. Our meta-analysis showed that AD but not MCI patients showed longer prosaccade latencies when compared to controls. While antisaccade latencies did not differentiate between patients from controls, antisaccade error rate were significantly increased among patients in comparison to controls in over 87% of the studies. These findings highlight antisaccade error rate as a reliable tool to distinguish inhibition abilities between AD/MCI and healthy older persons.
KeywordsProsaccade Antisaccade Meta-analysis Review Alzheimer’s Disease Mild cognitive impairment
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
All authors report no disclosures or conflict of interest.
- Boxer, A. L., Garbutt, S., Rankin, K. P., Hellmuth, J., Neuhaus, J., Miller, B. L., et al. (2006). Medial versus lateral frontal lobe contributions to voluntary saccade control as revealed by the study of patients with frontal lobe degeneration. Journal of Neuroscience, 26(23), 6354–6363.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Crutcher, M. D., Calhoun-Haney, R., Manzanares, C. M., Lah, J. J., Levey, A. I., & Zola, S. M. (2009). Eye tracking during a visual paired comparison task as a predictor of early dementia. American Journal of Alzheimer's Disease and Other Dementias, 24(3), 258–266.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Hannula, D. E., Althoff, R. R., Warren, D. E., Riggs, L., Cohen, N. J., & Ryan, J. D. (2010). Worth a glance: Using eye movements to investigate the cognitive neuroscience of memory. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 4(166), 52–67.Google Scholar
- Higgins, J. P., & Green, S. (2011). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions (Vol. 4). UK: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
- Jak, A. J., Preis, S. R., Beiser, A. S., Seshadri, S., Wolf, P. A., Bondi, M. W., et al. (2016). Neuropsychological Criteria for Mild Cognitive Impairment and Dementia Risk in the Framingham Heart Study. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 1-7.Google Scholar
- Mewborn, C. M., Lindbergh, C. A., & Stephen Miller, L. (2017). Cognitive Interventions for cognitively healthy, mildly impaired, and mixed samples of older adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials. Neuropsychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-11017-19350-11068.
- Pratt, J., Abrams, R. A., & Chasteen, A. L. (1997). Initiation and inhibition of saccadic eye movements in younger and older adults: An analysis of the gap effect. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 52(2), P103-P107.Google Scholar
- Rosenthal, R. (1991). Meta-analytic procedures for social research (Vol. 6): Sage.Google Scholar
- Sperling, R. A., Aisen, P. S., Beckett, L. A., Bennett, D. A., Craft, S., Fagan, A. M., et al. (2011). Toward defining the preclinical stages of Alzheimer’s disease: Recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer's Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimer's & Dementia, 7(3), 280–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar