| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Abdalla, H., et al.
(författare)
-
TeV Emission of Galactic Plane Sources with HAWC and HESS
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Astrophysical Journal. - : Institute of Physics Publishing (IOPP). - 0004-637X .- 1538-4357. ; 917:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The High Altitude Water Cherenkov (HAWC) observatory and the High Energy Stereoscopic System (H.E.S.S.) are two leading instruments in the ground-based very-high-energy gamma-ray domain. HAWC employs the water Cherenkov detection (WCD) technique, while H.E.S.S. is an array of Imaging Atmospheric Cherenkov Telescopes (IACTs). The two facilities therefore differ in multiple aspects, including their observation strategy, the size of their field of view, and their angular resolution, leading to different analysis approaches. Until now, it has been unclear if the results of observations by both types of instruments are consistent: several of the recently discovered HAWC sources have been followed up by IACTs, resulting in a confirmed detection only in a minority of cases. With this paper, we go further and try to resolve the tensions between previous results by performing a new analysis of the H.E.S.S. Galactic plane survey data, applying an analysis technique comparable between H.E.S.S. and HAWC. Events above 1 TeV are selected for both data sets, the point-spread function of H.E.S.S. is broadened to approach that of HAWC, and a similar background estimation method is used. This is the first detailed comparison of the Galactic plane observed by both instruments. H.E.S.S. can confirm the gamma-ray emission of four HAWC sources among seven previously undetected by IACTs, while the three others have measured fluxes below the sensitivity of the H.E.S.S. data set. Remaining differences in the overall gamma-ray flux can be explained by the systematic uncertainties. Therefore, we confirm a consistent view of the gamma-ray sky between WCD and IACT techniques.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Diaz-Galvan, P, et al.
(författare)
-
Cerebrovascular Disease and Depressive Symptomatology in Individuals With Subjective Cognitive Decline: A Community-Based Study
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Frontiers in aging neuroscience. - : Frontiers Media SA. - 1663-4365. ; 13, s. 656990-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Subjective cognitive decline (SCD) may be the first sign of Alzheimer's disease (AD), but it can also reflect other pathologies such as cerebrovascular disease or conditions like depressive symptomatology. The role of depressive symptomatology in SCD is controversial. We investigated the association between depressive symptomatology, cerebrovascular disease, and SCD. We recruited 225 cognitively unimpaired individuals from a prospective community-based study [mean age (SD) = 54.64 (10.18); age range 35–77 years; 55% women; 123 individuals with one or more subjective cognitive complaints, 102 individuals with zero complaints]. SCD was assessed with a scale of 9 memory and non-memory subjective complaints. Depressive symptomatology was assessed with established questionnaires. Cerebrovascular disease was assessed with magnetic resonance imaging markers of white matter signal abnormalities (WMSA) and mean diffusivity (MD). We combined correlation, multiple regression, and mediation analyses to investigate the association between depressive symptomatology, cerebrovascular disease, and SCD. We found that SCD was associated with more cerebrovascular disease, older age, and increased depressive symptomatology. In turn, depressive symptomatology was not associated with cerebrovascular disease. Variability in MD was mediated by WMSA burden, presumably reflecting cerebrovascular disease. We conclude that, in our community-based cohort, depressive symptomatology is associated with SCD but not with cerebrovascular disease. In addition, depressive symptomatology did not influence the association between cerebrovascular disease and SCD. We suggest that therapeutic interventions for depressive symptomatology could alleviate the psychological burden of negative emotions in people with SCD, and intervening on vascular risk factors to reduce cerebrovascular disease should be tested as an opportunity to minimize neurodegeneration in SCD individuals from the community.
|
|
| 10. |
- Diaz-Galvan, P, et al.
(författare)
-
Comparing different approaches for operationalizing subjective cognitive decline: impact on syndromic and biomarker profiles
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Scientific reports. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2045-2322. ; 11:1, s. 4356-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Subjective cognitive decline (SCD) has been proposed as a risk factor for future cognitive decline and dementia. Given the heterogeneity of SCD and the lack of consensus about how to classify this condition, different operationalization approaches still need to be compared. In this study, we used the same sample of individuals to compare different SCD operationalization approaches. We included 399 cognitively healthy individuals from a community-based cohort. SCD was assessed through nine questions about memory and non-memory subjective complaints. We applied four approaches to operationalize SCD: two hypothesis-driven approaches and two data-driven approaches. We characterized the resulting groups from each operationalization approach using multivariate methods on comprehensive demographic, clinical, cognitive, and neuroimaging data. We identified two main phenotypes: an amnestic phenotype characterized by an Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) signature pattern of brain atrophy; and an anomic phenotype, which was mainly related to cerebrovascular pathology. Furthermore, language complaints other than naming helped to identify a subgroup with subclinical cognitive impairment and difficulties in activities of daily living. This subgroup also showed an AD signature pattern of atrophy. The identification of SCD phenotypes, characterized by different syndromic and biomarker profiles, varies depending on the operationalization approach used. In this study we discuss how these findings may be used in clinical practice and research.
|
|
