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.

40/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100. Drug development

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Plain-language summary

We reviewed current knowledge about the interaction between stroke and vascular risk factors and the development of cognitive impairment and dementia. Stroke is increasingly recognized as an important cause of cognitive problems and has been implicated in the development of both Alzheimer's disease and vascular dementia. The prevalence of cognitive impairment after stroke is high, and their combined effects significantly increase the cost of care and health resource utilization, with reflections on hospital readmissions and increased mortality rates. There is also substantial evidence that vascular risk factors (such as hypertension, diabetes, obesity, dyslipidemia, and tobacco smoking) are independently associated with an increased risk of cognitive decline and dementia. Thus, a successful management of these factors, as well as optimal acute stroke management, might have a great impact on the development of cognitive impairment. Notwithstanding, the pathological link between cognitive impairment, stroke, and vascular risk factors is complex and still partially unclear so that further studies are needed to better elucidate the boundaries of this relationship. Many specific pharmacological treatments, including anticholinergic drugs and antihypertensive medications, and nonpharmacological approaches, such as diet, cognitive rehabilitation, and physical activity, have been studied for patients with vascular cognitive impairment, but the optimal care is still far away. Meanwhile, according to the most recent knowledge, optimal stroke care should also include cognitive assessment in the short and long term, and great efforts should be oriented toward a multidisciplinary approach, including quality-of-life assessment and support of caregivers.

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

APA 7th

Lo Coco, D., Lopez, G., & Corrao, S. (2016). Cognitive impairment and stroke in elderly patients. Vascular health and risk management. https://doi.org/10.2147/vhrm.s75306

Vancouver

Lo Coco D, Lopez G, Corrao S. Cognitive impairment and stroke in elderly patients. Vascular health and risk management. 2016. doi:10.2147/vhrm.s75306. PMID: 27069366.

BibTeX

@article{lococo2016-27069366,
  author  = {Lo Coco, D. and Lopez, G. and Corrao, S.},
  title   = {{Cognitive impairment and stroke in elderly patients}},
  journal = {Vascular health and risk management},
  year    = {2016},
  doi     = {10.2147/vhrm.s75306},
  pmid    = {27069366},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.2147/vhrm.s75306}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

How to read this study

Design: this is a narrative review. It summarises a field without a fixed search method, so it shows how authors read the evidence rather than measuring it. Use it to find the primary studies, not as a result in itself.
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

The prevalence of cognitive impairment after stroke is high, and their combined effects significantly increase the cost of care and health resource utilization, with reflections on hospital readmissions and increased mortality rates.
There is also substantial evidence that vascular risk factors (such as hypertension, diabetes, obesity, dyslipidemia, and tobacco smoking) are independently associated with an increased risk of cognitive decline and dementia.

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

Study details

Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 40/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people 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 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 40 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Vascular health and risk management)
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	2016 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here
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	0 / 3	Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
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 27069366)
Free to read	2 / 2	Free to read
Points	23 / 58	Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 40 out of 100.
Total	40 / 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 “elderly”

4 studies in the library carry the topic tag “elderly”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 4 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Drug development

See all studies in Drug development →