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 50 out of 100. Risk factors

Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment

To assess the validity of Yaakov Stern's theory, which postulates that the first cognitive deficits of Alzheimer disease are delayed in patients with high cognitive reserve, compared to those with low cognitive reserve, but this is subsequently associated with faster cognitive decline when cerebral lesions have reached a certain degree of severity. A retrospective study of 318 patients with Alzheimer disease without associated cerebral disorders, was performed at the Memory Clinic of the University Hospital of Strasbourg. The patients were divided into five groups according to their degree of cognitive reserve, as assessed by their level of education (primary, middle school, intermediate, high school and higher education). Cognitive status was assessed by scores on the Mini Mental Status Examination (MMSE) at the first examination and during follow-up lasting four years or longer. Slopes of cognitive decline were computed and compared between groups using ß linear regression. Patients in the higher education group had higher MMSE scores than those in the other groups at the first consultation, but a statistically significant steeper slope during the follow-up. Our results are consistent with Stern's theoretical model, which assumes that high cognitive reserve is accompanied by compensation mechanisms which hinder the onset of clinical cognitive decline in patients with Alzheimer disease, but that is then associated with a faster decline at a later stage when the reserve is exhausted.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 50/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 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 3 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 left out, no data. 28 of the 56 points it could be judged on, which is 50 of 100. Total 50 of 100.28 of the 56 points we could judge = 50 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed 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, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 28 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 50 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Geriatrie et psychologie neuropsychiatrie du vieillissement)
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 3 / 5 2022 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 2 / 4 318 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 35031531)
Free to read — / 2 Access not recorded — left out of this score
Points 28 / 56 Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 28 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 50 out of 100.
Total 50 / 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.

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. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Albrecht, P., Perisse, J., Sauleau, E.-A., & Blanc, F. (2022). Cognitive reserve as one of the determinants of the progression of Alzheimer disease. Geriatrie et psychologie neuropsychiatrie du vieillissement. https://doi.org/10.1684/pnv.2021.1000

Vancouver

Albrecht P, Perisse J, Sauleau E.-A, Blanc F. Cognitive reserve as one of the determinants of the progression of Alzheimer disease. Geriatrie et psychologie neuropsychiatrie du vieillissement. 2022. doi:10.1684/pnv.2021.1000. PMID: 35031531.

BibTeX

@article{albrecht2022-35031531,
  author  = {Albrecht, Pierre and Perisse, Jérémie and Sauleau, Erik-André and Blanc, Frédéric},
  title   = {{Cognitive reserve as one of the determinants of the progression of Alzheimer disease}},
  journal = {Geriatrie et psychologie neuropsychiatrie du vieillissement},
  year    = {2022},
  doi     = {10.1684/pnv.2021.1000},
  pmid    = {35031531},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1684/pnv.2021.1000}
}

Related studies in Risk factors

Similar studies

More on Risk factors

See all studies in Risk factors →