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.

41/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Drug development

Topic: Drug trials: efficacy and safety

Plain-language summary

Background Recent reports suggest that antihypertensive (AH) medications may reduce the risk of dementing illnesses. Objectives To examine the relationship of AH medication use with incidence of Alzheimer disease (AD) among the elderly population (aged 65 years and older) of Cache County, Utah, and to examine whether the relationship varies with different classes of AH medications. Methods After an initial (wave 1) multistage assessment (1995 through 1997) to identify prevalent cases of dementia, we used similar methods 3 years later (wave 2) to identify 104 incident cases of AD among the 3308 survivors. At the baseline assessment, we obtained a detailed drug inventory from the study participants. We carried out discrete time survival analyses to examine the association between the use of AH medications (including angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, and diuretics) at baseline with subsequent risk of AD. Results Use of any AH medication at baseline was associated with lower incidence of AD (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-0.98). Examination of medication subclasses showed that use of diuretics (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.33-0.94), and specifically potassium-sparing diuretics (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.26; 95% confidence interval, 0.08-0.64), was associated with the greatest reduction in risk of AD. Corresponding analysis with a fully examined subsample controlling for blood pressure measurements did not substantially change our findings. Conclusions These data suggest that AH medications, and specifically potassium-sparing diuretics, are associated with reduced incidence of AD. Because the latter association is a new finding, it requires confirmation in further study.

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

APA 7th

Khachaturian, A. S., Zandi, P. P., Lyketsos, C. G., Hayden, K. M., Skoog, I., Norton, M. C., et al. (2006). Antihypertensive medication use and incident Alzheimer disease: the Cache County Study. Archives of neurology. https://doi.org/10.1001/archneur.63.5.noc60013

Vancouver

Khachaturian AS, Zandi PP, Lyketsos CG, Hayden KM, Skoog I, Norton MC, et al. Antihypertensive medication use and incident Alzheimer disease: the Cache County Study. Archives of neurology. 2006. doi:10.1001/archneur.63.5.noc60013. PMID: 16533956.

BibTeX

@article{khachaturian2006-16533956,
  author  = {Khachaturian, A. S. and Zandi, P. P. and Lyketsos, C. G. and Hayden, K. M. and Skoog, I. and Norton, M. C. and Tschanz, J. T. and Mayer, L. S. and others},
  title   = {{Antihypertensive medication use and incident Alzheimer disease: the Cache County Study}},
  journal = {Archives of neurology},
  year    = {2006},
  doi     = {10.1001/archneur.63.5.noc60013},
  pmid    = {16533956},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1001/archneur.63.5.noc60013}
}

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.

How to read this study

Design: this is a trial. Participants are assigned to a treatment or a comparison, so the key questions are who was enrolled, whether the comparison group got a placebo or nothing, how long people were followed, and whether the result is on a measure that matters to patients or on a biomarker. Open-label and small trials can overstate benefit.
Size: the record gives no participant count. Look for one in the original before trusting a pattern.
Effect: the record gives no effect size, so the summary above cannot say how large any difference was.

What the evidence grade means here

This page is graded low. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. Low means the abstract matched neither pattern. It is the default label, and it does not mean the work is poor; many sound lab and imaging papers land here. It can add at most 5 of the 100 points in the study score, and it is a label about design, not a verdict on whether the findings are true.

New to reading papers? Six questions to ask of any Alzheimer’s study · how we score.

Key findings

Background Recent reports suggest that antihypertensive (AH) medications may reduce the risk of dementing illnesses.
Results Use of any AH medication at baseline was associated with lower incidence of AD (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-0.98).
Examination of medication subclasses showed that use of diuretics (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.33-0.94), and specifically potassium-sparing diuretics (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.26; 95% confidence interval, 0.08-0.64), was associated with the greatest reduction in risk of AD.
Corresponding analysis with a fully examined subsample controlling for blood pressure measurements did not substantially change our findings.
Conclusions These data suggest that AH medications, and specifically potassium-sparing diuretics, are associated with reduced incidence of AD.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →

Study details

Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 41/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported and randomized / 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 multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 24 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 41 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Archives of 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	2006 — older than 20 years, still counted
Sample size	0 / 4	Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
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 (pubmed indexes it as a clinical or observational study)
Randomized / blinded	0 / 2	No randomization 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
Multicenter collaboration	— / 3	Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 16533956)
Free to read	0 / 2	Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points	24 / 58	Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 24 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 41 out of 100.
Total	41 / 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.

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Related studies in Drug development from nearby years

Also tagged “cholinesterase”

271 studies in the library carry the topic tag “cholinesterase”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 271 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Drug development

See all studies in Drug development →