ライフサイエンスコーパス: verbal learning

1 emic achievement, visuospatial reasoning, or verbal learning.

2 ic deficit in the early processing stages of verbal learning.

3 We now extend that finding to human verbal learning.

4 term memory, cognitive processing speed, and verbal learning.

5 related with improvements in both design and verbal learning 12 months postoperatively.

6 satory changes in cerebral activation during verbal learning after sleep deprivation and implicate th

7 rformance compared with controls on tests of verbal learning and fluency, while bipolar probands show

8 Verbal learning and memory and attention are most consis

9 -based measures of verbal working memory and verbal learning and memory and is significantly associat

10 Verbal learning and memory deficits are among the most s

11 would attenuate ketamine-induced deficits in verbal learning and memory in humans.

12 greater decline in social functioning, lower verbal learning and memory performance, slower speed of

13 ren with OSAS, which correlates with a lower verbal learning and memory score.

14 n = 42) performed a dual-task paradigm and a verbal learning and memory test during and out of sympto

15 erformed significantly better on measures of verbal learning and memory than did those who had never

16 received iron performed better on a test of verbal learning and memory than girls in the control gro

17 Tests of processing speed and verbal learning and memory were most sensitive in discri

18 ine performance in verbal working memory and verbal learning and memory, accounting for 7% of the var

19 hapter focuses on recent research concerning verbal learning and memory.

20 lescent girls, iron supplementation improved verbal learning and memory.

21 elated with cognitive functioning, including verbal learning and memory.

22 global cognition, verbal working memory, and verbal learning and memory.

23 t small, declines in executive functions and verbal learning and memory.

24 THC may underlie the effects of C. sativa on verbal learning and psychotic symptoms, respectively.

25 ssed on ketamine-induced: (1) impairments in verbal learning and recall measured by the Hopkins Verba

26 processing speed, visual working memory and verbal learning and recall.

27 ed improvements most robustly in measures of verbal learning and short-term memory function.

28 ificantly reduced scores on the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning and Stroop Color-Word tests (indicative

29 . sativa acts in the human brain to modulate verbal learning and to induce psychotic symptoms.

30 cognition, processing speed, working memory, verbal learning and visual learning.

31 males on social cognition, processing speed, verbal learning and visual learning.

32 ed: verbal memory (VM), visual memory (VsM), verbal learning, and executive function.

33 al cognitive domains of attention/vigilance, verbal learning, and social cognition; however, neither

34 e flexibility, immediate and delayed recall, verbal learning, and visuomotor coordination were variab

35 nctional decline, and (d) subtle declines in verbal learning appear to precede clinical Alzheimer's d

36 f sustained attention (beta = 0.11; P<.001), verbal learning (beta = -1.51; P = .003), and visual-spa

37 AQP4 variant, which was also associated with verbal learning capacity change.

38 n diffusivity mediates the impact of OSAS on verbal learning capacity.

39 , executive functioning, working memory, and verbal learning compared to healthy individuals.

40 rder to expand on their previous findings of verbal learning deficits in these patients and to unders

41 e Buschke Selective Reminding Test to assess verbal learning during a 5-hour period after placebo or

42 n was also present when examining decline in verbal learning from 3 months to 1 year post-resection (

43 lined by about 30%; performance on a test of verbal learning improved by about 100% during treatment

44 ep deprivation on cerebral activation during verbal learning in normal young volunteers.

45 ively correlated significantly with improved verbal learning in patients with left temporal lobe epil

46 Verbal learning is accompanied by specific response decr

47 ith placebo occurred at final assessment for verbal learning (least squares mean difference=5.5, SE=1

48 avioral paradigm to test memory performance [verbal learning memory test (VLMT)] with state of the ar

49 ed processing speed, executive function, and verbal learning/memory in survivors compared with contro

50 Attention/working memory, verbal learning/memory, and complex processing speed wer

51 l State examination; four cognitive factors: verbal learning/memory, auditory attention/working memor

52 n, (5) sensory-perceptual processing and (6) verbal learning/memory.

53 apid visual information processing task) and verbal learning (on the California Verbal Learning Test)

54 as poorer in RIRP than controls on a test of verbal learning (p=0.022) and of fine co-ordination of t

55 ction, language, executive function, memory, verbal learning, perceptual organization and visuomotor

56 Cannabis sativa use can impair verbal learning, provoke acute psychosis, and increase t

57 ith scores on cognitive measures of episodic verbal learning (r = 0.30, P < 0.05).

58 subjects on rapid visuomotor sequencing and verbal learning/recall.

59 ing in early auditory processes and auditory-verbal learning results in substantial gains in verbal c

60 l measures (p values >0.5); however, a lower verbal learning score correlated with lower dentate gyru

61 WAIS-R IQ, verbal fluency, and Rey Auditory Verbal Learning scores at first illness episode.

62 he tau pathology, the greater the decline in verbal learning (Spearman correlation, r = -0.63), recal

63 been thought that propensities for visual or verbal learning styles influence how children acquire kn

64 ropsychological battery, or performance on a verbal learning task administered during [(18)F]fluorode

65 or relative glucose metabolic rates during a verbal learning task and for relative gray matter volume

66 Performance in the verbal learning task was not significantly modulated by

67 s, and these groups also performed better on verbal learning tasks.

68 difficult auditory-verbal working memory and verbal learning tasks.

69 , prepulse inhibition (5p15), the California Verbal Learning Test (8q24), the degraded-stimulus Conti

70 we assessed memory tasks with low (Auditory Verbal Learning Test (AVLT) discriminability), moderate

71 Raven's Progressive Matrices (RPM), Auditory Verbal Learning Test (AVLT), digit symbol (DS) subtest,

72 ncluding the primary outcome, the California Verbal Learning Test (CVLT), at baseline and 24 mo.

73 verbal memory, immediate recall [California Verbal Learning Test (CVLT), List A; prediction II: beta

74 obiographical Memory Test and the California Verbal Learning Test (CVLT).

75 Memory Scale-Revised (WMS-R) and California Verbal Learning Test (CVLT).

76 ore on the delayed portion of the California Verbal Learning Test (CVLT).

77 t baseline and endpoint by using the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) and subscales of the Kaufman

78 ate better function) and the revised Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT-R; 12-item word list recall t

79 memory impairment as assessed by the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (P<.05).

80 +/- 4 y) through the use of the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT) for verbal memory, the Digi

81 ; worse forgetting score on the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT) over time [p = 0.02, beta +

82 SST), modified Stroop test, and Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT) were completed at year 25.

83 rtiary outcomes were changes in Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT), Beck Depression Inventory-

84 ater hippocampal volumes and better Auditory Verbal Learning Test 30-minute delay and Trail Making Te

85 nd persisting verbal (mean [SE] Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test [RAVLT], delayed recall: patients,

86 titution Test, Stroop Test, and Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test analyzed with standardized z scores

87 signments were confirmed with the California Verbal Learning Test and degraded-stimulus Continuous Pe

88 and neurocognitive test scores (Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test and Groton Maze Learning Test).

89 85, 95% CI=0.76 to 0.96) and higher auditory verbal learning test delay score (RR=0.86, 95% CI=0.77 t

90 s measures of general cognition and Auditory-Verbal Learning Test delayed recall, Boston naming and T

91 Subjects performed a serial verbal learning test during (18)F-deoxyglucose uptake.

92 Subjects performed a serial verbal learning test during the [(18)F]-fluorodeoxygluco

93 d 32 control subjects who performed a serial verbal learning test during tracer uptake.

94 al Memory Test-Revised (BVMT) and California Verbal Learning Test II (CVLT).

95 Results for the California Verbal Learning Test indicated improved learning for bot

96 g adults (18-32 years old) on the California Verbal Learning Test Long Delay Free Recall test.

97 apparent differences on either Rey Auditory-Verbal Learning Test or Boston Naming Test.

98 piciousness, symbol coding test performance, verbal learning test performance, decline in social func

99 io was associated with postoperative Hopkins Verbal Learning Test Retention [Z score = 8.351; age, se

100 ad normal but significantly lower California Verbal Learning Test scores compared with control partic

101 Hippocampal volume, age, California Verbal Learning Test scores, and the number of grade 3 (

102 rieth Complex Figure Test and the California Verbal Learning Test to compare memory functioning of 37

103 task) and verbal learning (on the California Verbal Learning Test) as the best indicators of manic pe

104 ory decline (assessed using the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test) occurred in 4 participants (36%) a

105 rwent testing of verbal memory (Rey Auditory-Verbal Learning Test), visual-spatial memory (Medical Co

106 sts (two 15-item lists from the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test).

107 5% CI, 0.25 to 1.19; P = .003), Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, 0.18 (95% CI, 0.07 to 0.29; P = .0

108 iative States Scale, verbal fluency, Hopkins Verbal Learning Test, a biphasic alcohol effects scale,

109 , 1.56 (1.13-2.14), but not the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, adjusted for age, race, sex, educa

110 (-0.38 to 0.25; p=0.69) for the Rey auditory verbal learning test, and 0.01 (-0.26 to 0.29; p=0.92) f

111 ing, memory assessment with the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, and mood ratings with the Beck Dep

112 ask, Word Fluency Test, Stroop test, 15-word Verbal Learning Test, and Purdue Pegboard Test) and comp

113 trail-making A and B tests, the Rey auditory verbal learning test, and the grooved pegboard test.

114 Digit Symbol Substitution Test, Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, and the modified Stroop test were

115 llowing memory and mood measures: California Verbal Learning Test, recall of the Rey-Osterrieth Compl

116 ognitive function (verbal memory [California Verbal Learning Test, second edition] and IQ [Wechsler A

117 (Degraded Stimulus version), the California Verbal Learning Test, the Letter-Number Sequencing test,

118 oint drop compared with baseline) in Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised (HVLT-R) total recall at 4

119 who underwent assessments of memory (Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised [HVLT-R]), attention and ex

120 The primary end point was the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised Delayed Recall (HVLT-R DR)

121 We analysed the primary outcome, Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised delayed verbal recall (HVLT

122 NCF tests (Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised, Trail Making Test, and Con

123 ber Span test and scales from the California Verbal Learning Test-Second Edition, the Wechsler Memory

124 (Pearson r = 0.58; P < .01) and the Auditory Verbal Learning Test-Total Learning (Pearson r = 0.33; P

125 t, a verbal fluency task, and the California Verbal Learning Test.

126 lucose F 18, all patients performed a serial verbal learning test.

127 essment Battery for Children and the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test.

128 n Test (DSST), Stroop test, and Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test.

129 learning and recall measured by the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test; (2) impairments in working memory

130 ignificant strengths in verbal intelligence, verbal learning, verbal memory, and reading, and signifi

131 gher sCD14 levels were associated with worse verbal learning, verbal memory, executive function, and

132 ted with worse overall performance and worse verbal learning, verbal memory, executive function, psyc

133 fect in nonsmoking subjects, particularly in verbal learning, working memory, and attention.