Execu&vefunc&oningwasassessedthroughfourtasksoftheENFENba9ery (Fluency, Trail-Making –Black&White and colour versions-,Hanoi´sTowersandInhibiAontasks;seeFigure1).sAAwasmeasuredatbaseline,oneminutebeforeandoneminuteaDertheendoftheneuropsychological tes&ng session (see Figure 1). Saliva samplingwasconductedusingthepassivemethod(1minuteof&mepereachsaliva sample). All neuropsychological tes&ng sessions wereconductedinschools.

Maldonado

23

Table 2.

Descriptive statistics (mean ± SD, range and n) of scores in ENFEN battery (for available subjects).

PF-DI = Direct score in Phonologic Fluency; PF-DE = Decatype score in Phonologic Fluency; SF-DI = Direct score in Semantic Fluency; SF-DE = Decatype

score in Semantic Fluency; TBW-DI = Direct score in Trail-Making Test Black&White version; TBW-DE = Decatype score in Trail-Making Test

Black&White version; TC-DI = Direct score in Trail-Making Test Color version; TC-DE = Decatype score in Trail Making-Test Color version; T-DI = Direct

score in Towers; T-DE = Decatype score in Towers; I-DI = Direct score in Inhibition; I-DE = Decatype score in Inhibition.

Table 3.

Scale PF-DI PF-DE SF-DI SF-DE TBW-DI TBW-DE

mean ± SD

(range)

n

8.64 ± 3.66

(1-20)

n = 70

4.19 ± 2.20

(1-10)

n = 70

15.54 ± 4.39

(6- 28)

n = 70

5.54 ± 1.99

(1 - 10)

n = 70

23.42 ± 6.92

(10.16 – 45.79)

n = 70

5.29 ± 1.98

(1 – 9)

n = 70

Scale TC-DI TC-DE T-DI T-DE I-DI I-DE

mean ± SD

(range)

n

13.86 ± 5.02

(5,88 - 29)

n = 70

4.53 ± 1.77

(1-9)

n = 70

239.27 ± 70.91

(114 – 492,16)

n = 70

3.33 ± 1.59

(1 - 8)

n = 70

75.52 ± 22.73

(18 - 144)

n = 70

5.49 ± 1.95

(1 - 10)

n = 70

Maldonado

24

Descriptive statistics (mean ± SD, range and n) of salivary measures (for available subjects).

sAA activity

(U/ml)

Baseline Pretest Postest Mean

mean ± SD

(range)

n

126.03 ± 87.50

(16 – 411.33)

n = 67

138.53 ± 101.55

(11.60 – 581.50)

n = 67

149.00 ± 100.44

(23 - 533)

n = 67

143.76 ± 96.65

(25.25 – 550.25)

n = 67

sAA output

(ml/min)

Baseline Pretest Postest Mean

mean ± SD

(range)

n

83.60 ± 99.35

(4.09 – 429.25)

n = 67

86.57 ± 85.97

(3.46 – 453.57)

n = 67

111.17 ± 111.25

(1 – 580.97)

n = 67

98.78 ± 93.84

(7.93 – 496.85)

n = 67

SFR

(ml/min)

Baseline Pretest Postest Mean

Maldonado

23

Table 2.

Descriptive statistics (mean ± SD, range and n) of scores in ENFEN battery (for available subjects).

PF-DI = Direct score in Phonologic Fluency; PF-DE = Decatype score in Phonologic Fluency; SF-DI = Direct score in Semantic Fluency; SF-DE = Decatype

score in Semantic Fluency; TBW-DI = Direct score in Trail-Making Test Black&White version; TBW-DE = Decatype score in Trail-Making Test

Black&White version; TC-DI = Direct score in Trail-Making Test Color version; TC-DE = Decatype score in Trail Making-Test Color version; T-DI = Direct

score in Towers; T-DE = Decatype score in Towers; I-DI = Direct score in Inhibition; I-DE = Decatype score in Inhibition.

Table 3.

Scale PF-DI PF-DE SF-DI SF-DE TBW-DI TBW-DE

mean ± SD

(range)

n

8.64 ± 3.66

(1-20)

n = 70

4.19 ± 2.20

(1-10)

n = 70

15.54 ± 4.39

(6- 28)

n = 70

5.54 ± 1.99

(1 - 10)

n = 70

23.42 ± 6.92

(10.16 – 45.79)

n = 70

5.29 ± 1.98

(1 – 9)

n = 70

Scale TC-DI TC-DE T-DI T-DE I-DI I-DE

mean ± SD

(range)

n

13.86 ± 5.02

(5,88 - 29)

n = 70

4.53 ± 1.77

(1-9)

n = 70

239.27 ± 70.91

(114 – 492,16)

n = 70

3.33 ± 1.59

(1 - 8)

n = 70

75.52 ± 22.73

(18 - 144)

n = 70

5.49 ± 1.95

(1 - 10)

n = 70

Maldonado

25

sAA = salivary alpha-amylase; SFR = salivary flow rate

mean ± SD

(range)

n

0.61 ± 0.45

(0.11 – 2.10)

n = 67

0.64 ± 0.38

(0.04 – 1.62)

n = 67

0.74 ± 0.43

(0.01 – 1.95)

n = 67

0.69 ± 0.38

(0.05 – 1.55)

n = 67Maldonado

26

Table 4.

Partial correlations (Pearson`s correlation coefficient) between scores in the ENFEN battery and salivary measures after controlling the effect of body mass

index (BMI).

PF-W PF-D SF-W SF-D TBW-W TBW-D TC-W TC-D T-W T-D I-W I-D

Baseline

(mean sAA)

- - - - - - - 0,215* - - - -

Pretest (mean

sAA)

- - - - 0,265* - 0,275* - - - - -

Posttest (mean

sAA)

- - - - 0,310* - 0,275* 0,259* - - - -

Baseline

(mean sFAA)

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Pretest (mean

sFAA)

0,268* - - - 0,366** 0,294* 0,277* - - - - -

Posttest (mean

sFAA)

- - - - 0,365** 0,281* 0,286* 0,260* -0,247* - 0,245* -Maldonado

27

Baseline

(mean SFR)

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Pretest (mean

SFR)

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Posttest (mean

SFR)

- - - - - - - - - - - -

† p = 0.10, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01

Maldonado

28

Table 5.

Regression Model (step wise method) for salivary measures predicting scores of ENFEN battery.

Variable B SE β Adjusted R2

PF-DI

meanFAA 0,301 0,106 0,324 0,006

TBW-DI

meanFAA 0,783 0,199 0,433 0,000

TBW-DE

meanFAA 0,164 0,059 0,323 0,007

TC-DI

meanFAA 0,392 0,149 0,309 0,010

T-DI

sFAA Posttest -4,910 2,020 -0,281 0,018

I-DI

sAA Posttest 1,560 0,698 0,260 0,029

* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01

ASSOCIATIONAMONGSALIVARYALPHA-AMYLASEACTIVITYANDEXECUTIVEFUNCTIONING

INHEALTHYCHILDREN

Introduc>on

Material&Methods

Results:

Results&Conclusions

Laboraratorio Neuropsicología Clínica UMA

Execu&ve func&oning is the result of the combined ac&on of acomplex set of high-level cogni&ve processes that emerge duringchildhood. These execu&ve func&ons enable a child to managechallenging problems and regulate their emo&onal behaviour.Several studieshave related thebiomarker sAA tobe9erexecu&vefunc&oning. The main aim of this study was to confirm theassocia&onbetweenexecu&veperformanceandsAAac&vityandsAAoutputinanini&alsampleof73healthychildren(45boys;seeTable1).

Our results show a lineal and significant associa&on between sAA (see sAA values in Table 3) and performance in the PhonologicalFluency, Trail-Making and Inhibi&on tests but a nega&ve associa&on with Towers scores (see ENFEN scores inTable 2 and par&alcorrela&ons in4).Mean levelof sAAoutputwas thebestpredictor in thePhonological FluencyandTrail-Making testswhereas sAAoutputandac&vitymeasuredattheendofthetes&ngsessionwerethebestpredictorsoftheTowersandInhibi&onscores(seeTable5). Hence, themeasurement of sAA outuput represents a non invasivemethodological tool for the non-invasive assessment of thedevelopmentofexecu&vefunc&oninginchildpopula&ons.

4ENFENTASKS

TIME

Baseline

Pretest

Postest

Figure 1.

Saliva Sampling Procedure

U/ml

Download this poster from:

Table 1. Descriptive statistics (mean ± SD) for both genders of age, body mass index (BMI), family income per month and parental education. Parameters Full sample (n = 73) Boys (n = 45) Girls (n = 28) Age 9.95 ± 1.48 9.98 ± 1.50 9.90 ± 1.39

(7.3 - 12.3) (7.5 - 12.3) (7.3 - 12.3) (n = 73) (n = 28) (n = 45) BMI 14.32 ± 3.50 14.08 ± 3.54 14.75 ± 3.85

(8.41 - 28.71) (9.89 - 28.71) (8.41 - 22.57) (n = 72) (n = 28) (n = 45) Family income per month 1265.22 ± 689.27 2051.81 ± 2113.65 1795.00 ± 693.05 (euros) (0 - 3000) (620-3000) (0-3000) (n = 63) (n = 28) (n = 45) Parental education Fathers No studies 4 1 0 Less than primary school studies 1 1 2 Primary school studies 30 17 7 Profesional Training 19 9 9 Secondary school studies 8 1 4 University studies 31 13 5 Master´s degree 2 1 0 (n = 43) (n = 27) Mothers No studies 0 0 0 Less than primary school studies 0 0 0 Primary school studies 20 8 9 Profesional Training 27 12 9 Secondary school studies 17 6 6 University studies 28 15 3 Master´s degree 2 1 0 (n = 42) (n = 27)

Maldonado,E.F.etal.DeparmentofPsychobiology&Methodology,SchoolofPsychology,MalagaUniversity.CampusTeaAnos,C.P.29071,Malaga,Spain.

Workingmemorycapaci&eswereassessedbymeansoffiveWISC-Vsubtests: four auditory subtests (Digit Span and LeQer-NumberSequencing subtests) andone visual subtest (Picture Span subtest).sAAwasmeasuredasfollows:baseline(10minutespriortotes&ng),oneminuteprior to tes&ng,oneminuteaDer theauditoryworkingmemory subtest and oneminute aDer the visual workingmemorysubtest (see Figure 1). Saliva samples were obtained through thepassivemethod.

ASSOCIATIONAMONGSALIVARYALPHA-AMYLASEACTIVITYANDWORKINGMEMORYFUNCTIONING

INHEALTHYCHILDREN

Introduc>on

Material&Methods

Results:

Conclusions

SalivaryAlpha-Amylase(sAA)isabiomarkerthathasbeenassociatedwith execu&ve func&oning and working memory performance inprevious studies. The aim of this work was to examine theassocia&onbetweenworkingmemoryperformanceandsAAac&vityandoutputinasampleof73healthychildren(44boysand29girls).InTable1abriefdescrip&onofpar&cipantsisshown.

These results show the usefulness of sAA and SFR, respec&vely, as non-invasive biomarkers of auditory-verbal and visual workingmemoryperformanceinstudiesonchildren.

WISC-VAuditoryWM

TIME

Baseline

Sample 1 Sample 3

Figure 1.

Saliva Sampling Procedure

U/ml

Download this poster from:

Sample 2 WISC-VVisualWM

Table 1. Descriptive statistics (mean ± SD) of age, body mass index (BMI), family income per month

and education levels of the parents of our participants.

Test category n M SD Range

Age 73 9.86 1.47 7.3 - 12.3

BMI 73 14.32 3.50 8.41 - 28.71

Family income per month (Euros per month) 72 2334.62 940.98 600 - 5300

Parental education

Fathers

No studies 3

Less than primary school studies 1

Primary school studies 30

Professional Training 19

Secondary school studies 8

University studies 31

Master's degree 2

Mothers

No studies 0

Table 1. Descriptive statistics (mean ± SD) of age, body mass index (BMI), family income per month

and education levels of the parents of our participants.

Test category n M SD Range

Age 73 9.86 1.47 7.3 - 12.3

BMI 73 14.32 3.50 8.41 - 28.71

Family income per month (Euros per month) 72 2334.62 940.98 600 - 5300

Parental education

Fathers

No studies 3

Less than primary school studies 1

Primary school studies 30

Professional Training 19

Secondary school studies 8

University studies 31

Master's degree 2

Mothers

No studies 0

Less than primary school studies 0

Primary school studies 20

Professional Training 27

Secondary school studies 17

University studies 28

Master's degree 2

Table 2. Descriptive statistics (mean ± SD and range) of WISC-V scores for our participants.

Test category n M SD Range

Auditory Digit Span Direct (ADSD) 73 7.56 1.72 4 - 13

ADSD_NDLT 73 5.14 1.01 2 - 7

Auditory Digit Span Inverse (ADSI) 73 8.49 2.21 3 - 9

ADSI_NDLT 73 3.86 1.01 2 - 7

Ascending Order Repeating task (ADSA) 73 7.60 2.66 2 - 14

ADSA_NDLT 73 4.81 1.16 2 - 8

Auditory Digit Span Total (ADST) 73 23.66 5.50 13 - 41

Letters & Numbers (LNT) 73 15.25 4.12 3 - 23

LNT_NDLT 72 4.14 0.93 2 - 7

Picture Span (PST) 61 30.70 7.47 12 - 45

PST_NSSSP 61 4.72 0.85 3 - 6

PST_NSSRP 61 9.25 1.90 6 - 12

*_NDLT = number of digits in the last attempt; _NSSSP = number of stimuli included in the stimulus page with the last

correct attempt , _NSSRP = number of stimuli included in the response page with the last correct attempt

Table 3.

Descriptive statistics (mean ± SD and range) of sAA activity, output, and SFR levels in our participants.

Baseline Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Total mean Mean 1-2 Mean 2-3 Delta 2-1 Delta 3-2 AUCg AUCi

Salivary AA activity

n 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 72 72

M 126.45 147.30 147.79 128.41 136.99 146.55 137.10 -1.50 -17.38 345843.35 69576.65

SD 86.03 99.56 102.21 71.15 78.96 97.46 81.33 52.23 67.50 1,95E+10 1,61E+10

Range 16 – 411.33 15 – 533.00 23 – 621.83 23 - 34520.63 – 435.92 19 – 577.42 23 – 399.67

-244.50 – 129.25 444.33 – 84

46890 – 1125376.20 0 – 399900

Salivary AA output

n 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 66 66

M 83.60 100.41 92.40 89.13 91.38 96.40 90.76 -8.01 -3.27 23687.08 63825.54

SD 99.35 110.70 76.58 98.83 81.84 87.75 79.28 73.75 78.25 2,03E+10 89361.10

Range 4.09 – 425.25 1 – 580.97 1.02 – 335.790.68 –

688.60 1.70 – 410.99 1.01 – 458.38 0.85 – 456.06-276.63 –

152.82-227.51 –

465.093367.50 –

973042.20 0 – 513037.50

Salivary flow rate

n 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 66 66

M 0.61 0.65 0.67 0.67 0.65 0.66 0.67 1.34 -0.0036 1692.70 324.50

SD 0.45 0.40 0.41 0.48 0.36 0.37 0.39 0.78 0.44 1125.63 441.18

Range 0.11 – 2.10 0.01 – 1.95 0.01 – 1.97 0.01 – 3.13 0.05 – 1.65 0.01 – 1.83 0.01 – 1.88 0.02 – 3.75 -1.07 – 2.51 68.40 – 6117.60 0 – 1663.50

Table 5.

Regression model for salivary measurements predicting scores on the WISC-V battery and salivary measurements after controlling for the effect of body mass

index (BMI).

Variable B SE β Adjusted R2

ADSA

Delta 2-1 sAAA -0.009 0.003 -0.344 1.105**

ADSA-NDLT

AUCI SFR -0.001 0.000 -0.350 0.109**

ADST

Delta 2-1 sAAA -0.014 0.007 -0.253 0.050*

LNT

Saliva 2 sAAO 0.262 0.111 0.284 0.066*

LNT-NDLT

Delta SFR 3-2 0.807 0.248 0.377 0.129**

PST

Sample 4 SFR 5.065 2.035 0.324 0.088*

PST-NSSSP

Sample 4 SFR 0.569 0.224 0.330 0.0982*

PST-NSSRP

Mean 2-3 SFR 1.639 0.637 0.333 0.094*

* p < 0.05. ** p < 0.01

Our sta&s&cal analyses showedanassocia&onamongsAAac&vityandoutputlevels(seeitsvaluesinTable3)and various parameters used to describe theperformanceofeachpar&cipantontheDigitSpanandLeQer-Number Sequencing subtests while visualworkingmemory performancewas best predicted bysalivaryflowrate(SFR),aDercontrollingfortheeffectof BMI (see working memory scores in Table 2 andregressionanalysesresultsinTable5).

Laboraratorio Neuropsicología Clínica UMA

Maldonado,E.F.etal.DeparmentofPsychobiology&Methodology,SchoolofPsychology,MalagaUniversity.CampusTeaAnos,C.P.29071,Malaga,Spain.