Skip to main content
. 2014 Nov 12;138(1):80–93. doi: 10.1093/brain/awu313

Table 2.

Correlations of ipsilesional temporal lobe structural measures and memory outcome at follow-up

Left temporal lobe surgery, ipsilesional
Right temporal lobe surgery, ipsilesional
Memory measure Volume
Temporal pole integrity Volume
Temporal pole integrity
Resection Hippocampus Resection Hippocampus
Verbal memory
WMS-R Story −0.39 0.50*,a,b 0.13 −0.27 0.47 0.20
D&P Verbal memory −0.24 0.56*,a,b 0.41 −0.37 0.52*,a 0.41
CAVLT Learning −0.48* 0.36 0.60**,a,b −0.43 0.34 0.12
CAVLT loss after delay −0.01 0.04 −0.17 0.49 0.17 0.10
Visual memory
WMS-R Design −0.41* 0.34 0.41* −0.32 0.21 0.15
D&P Visual memory −0.18 0.51*,a 0.27 −0.53*,a 0.12 0.10
Semantic memory
IQ-derived semantic memory −0.34 0.19 0.29 −0.36 0.33 0.24
Category fluency −0.67**,a,b 0.57*,a 0.53* −0.39 0.46 0.39
BPVS −0.47* 0.29 0.50*,a,b −0.28 0.41 0.22

*P < 0.05, **P < 0.01.

aSignificant after controlling for FSIQ.

bSignificant after controlling for language lateralization index. Although findings are frequently significant in the left but not right surgical sample, differences between correlation coefficients are not significant between groups (test for significance between two correlation coefficients, minimum P = 0.09).

Bold correlation values are significant at p < 0.05.