Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. How common it is

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

The term Precision Aging describes an approach that focuses on multi-domain profiles of risks impacting individual trajectories of age-related cognitive functioning. The goal of the present study was to identify profiles of risk within a sample of 555 adults, ages 50 to 79, without diagnosis of dementia. Using cluster analyses, we considered 38 risk factors associated with five categories of risk known to negatively impact cognitive aging - cardiovascular insufficiency, glucose dysregulation, inflammation, immune dysfunction, and neuropathology. Results yielded five profiles, including a group with low risk in all five risk categories, and four groups with prominent risks in specific domains. Importantly, all four high risk groups performed more poorly relative to the low risk group on multiple memory measures from a well-established neuropsychological test, the Auditory Verbal Learning Test. The results highlight the importance of considering multiple domains of risk within the same cohort to predict age-related cognitive functioning.

Key findings

Why it matters

Among adults without a dementia diagnosis, those with prominent risk in specific domains performed worse on memory tests than a low-risk group. This is a clustering study of risk profiles and does not test any treatment or prevention.

Study details

How this study scored 16/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 2 of 10; Journal's citation record 0 of 4; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 4 of 10; How recent 5 of 5; Sample size 2 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 0 of 7; Citations per year 0 of 5; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here 0 of 6; Still being cited 0 of 4; Senior author's track record 3 of 4; Institution's track record 2 of 3; Multi-centre collaboration 2 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 1 of 2; Free to read 2 of 2. 29 of the 94 points it could be judged on, which is 31 of 100. Raw total 31 of 100, shown as 16 because this is not a peer-reviewed research article.raw total 31 of 100capped at 16 — hatched points do not count

Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. It scored 31 on the same rubric, but non-peer-reviewed sources are capped at 16, so it shows as 16. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on impact for its field and year, so that was left out: it earned 29 of the 94 points we could judge it on, which is 31 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 2 / 10 Tier 4 — not a peer-reviewed journal (medRxiv (preprint))
Journal's citation record 0 / 4 Not a journal article, so the journal's record does not count
Study design 0 / 12 No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence 3 / 5 Rated “moderate” in our summary
Peer-review validation 4 / 10 Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. Hosted on a preprint server.
How recent 5 / 5 2026 — within 1 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 2 / 4 555 participants
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited 0 / 7 Cited 0 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 0 / 5 0.0 citations a year over 2 year(s) since 2026
Impact for its field and year — / 6 No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here 0 / 6 No other study in this library cites it
Still being cited 0 / 4 Cited 0 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record 3 / 4 Last-listed author Matthew J. Huentelman: h-index 75 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record 2 / 3 Johns Hopkins University: institution h-index 2,306 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration 2 / 3 OpenAlex lists 5 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed 1 / 2 Not in PubMed, but has a DOI
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 29 / 94 Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 29 of the 94 points we could judge it on is 31 out of 100.
Total 31 / 100 Capped to 16 because this is not a peer-reviewed article.

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Ryan, L., Ortiz, O. S., Pettigrew, C. A., Soldan, A., LaFleur, B., Levin, B., et al. (2026). A Precision Aging Approach to Cognitive Aging: Clustering Multiple Domains of Risk. medRxiv (preprint). https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.08.18.26360626

Vancouver

Ryan L, Ortiz OS, Pettigrew CA, Soldan A, LaFleur B, Levin B, et al. A Precision Aging Approach to Cognitive Aging: Clustering Multiple Domains of Risk. medRxiv (preprint). 2026. doi:10.64898/2026.08.18.26360626.

BibTeX

@article{ryan2026-b847704e,
  author  = {Ryan, L. and Ortiz, O. S. and Pettigrew, C. A. and Soldan, A. and LaFleur, B. and Levin, B. and Lah, J. J. and Hay and others},
  title   = {{A Precision Aging Approach to Cognitive Aging: Clustering Multiple Domains of Risk}},
  journal = {medRxiv (preprint)},
  year    = {2026},
  doi     = {10.64898/2026.08.18.26360626},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.08.18.26360626}
}

Related studies in How common it is

Also tagged “cognitive-function”

1,118 studies in the library carry the topic tag “cognitive-function”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,118 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on How common it is

See all studies in How common it is →