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.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100. Disease mechanisms

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Objective Several studies report that diabetes increases risk of cognitive impairment; some have hypothesized that advanced glycation end products (AGEs) underlie this association. AGEs are cross-linked products that result from reactions between glucose and proteins. Little is known about the association between peripheral AGE concentration and cognitive aging. Methods We prospectively studied 920 elders without dementia, 495 with diabetes and 425 with normal glucose (mean age 74.0 years). Using mixed models, we examined baseline AGE concentration, measured with urine pentosidine and analyzed as tertile, and performance on the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination (3MS) and Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST) at baseline and repeatedly over 9 years. Incident cognitive impairment (a decline of >1.0 SD on each test) was analyzed with logistic regression. Results Older adults with high pentosidine level had worse baseline DSST score (p=0.05) but not different 3MS score (p=0.32). On both tests, there was a more pronounced 9-year decline in those with high and mid pentosidine level compared to those in the lowest tertile (3MS 7.0, 5.4, and 2.5 point decline, p overall <0.001; DSST 5.9, 7.4, and 4.5 point decline, p=0.03). Incident cognitive impairment was higher in those with high or mid pentosidine level than those in the lowest tertile (3MS: 24% vs 17%, odds ratio=1.55; 95% confidence interval 1.07-2.26; DSST: 31% vs 22%, odds ratio=1.62; 95% confidence interval 1.13-2.33). There was no interaction between pentosidine level, diabetes status, and cognitive decline. Multivariate adjustment for age, sex, race, education, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and diabetes diminished results somewhat but overall patterns remained similar. Conclusion High peripheral AGE level is associated with greater cognitive decline in older adults with and without diabetes.

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

APA 7th

Yaffe, K., Lindquist, K., Schwartz, A. V., Vitartas, C., Vittinghoff, E., Satterfield, S., et al. (2011). Advanced glycation end product level, diabetes, and accelerated cognitive aging. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0b013e3182315a56

Vancouver

Yaffe K, Lindquist K, Schwartz AV, Vitartas C, Vittinghoff E, Satterfield S, et al. Advanced glycation end product level, diabetes, and accelerated cognitive aging. Neurology. 2011. doi:10.1212/wnl.0b013e3182315a56. PMID: 21900628.

BibTeX

@article{yaffe2011-21900628,
  author  = {Yaffe, K. and Lindquist, K. and Schwartz, A. V. and Vitartas, C. and Vittinghoff, E. and Satterfield, S. and Simonsick, E. M. and Launer, L. and others},
  title   = {{Advanced glycation end product level, diabetes, and accelerated cognitive aging}},
  journal = {Neurology},
  year    = {2011},
  doi     = {10.1212/wnl.0b013e3182315a56},
  pmid    = {21900628},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0b013e3182315a56}
}

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.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 48/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 9 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 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 left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 28 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 48 of 100. Total 48 of 100.28 of the 58 points we could judge = 48 of 100

Published in a leading specialty journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 28 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 48 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 9 / 10 Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Neurology)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 0 / 12 No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence 1 / 5 Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 1 / 5 2011 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 2 / 4 920 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 — / 7 No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year — / 5 No citation count or no year — left out of this score
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 — / 6 Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited — / 4 No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record — / 4 Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record — / 3 No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multi-centre collaboration — / 3 Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 21900628)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 28 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 28 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 48 out of 100.
Total 48 / 100 —

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

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Related studies in Disease mechanisms

Also tagged “controlled”

1,118 studies in the library carry the topic tag “controlled”; 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 Disease mechanisms

See all studies in Disease mechanisms →