Home › Research › Risk factors
Cognitive reserve proxies, Alzheimer pathologies, and cognition
Kang Ko, Dahyun Yi, Min Soo Byun, Jun Ho Lee, So Yeon Jeon, Woo Jin Kim, Gihwan Byeon, Kiyoung Sung et al.. Neurobiology of aging, 2021-10-14
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
This study aimed to explore the moderating effects of the frequently used cognitive reserve (CR) proxies [i.e., education, premorbid intelligence quotient (pIQ), occupational complexity (OC), and lifetime cognitive activity (LCA)] on the relationships between various in vivo Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathologies and cognition. In total, 351 [268 cognitively unimpaired (CU), 83 cognitive impaired (CI)] older adults underwent multi-modal brain imaging to measure AD pathologies and cognitive assessments, and information on CR proxies was obtained. For overall participants, only education moderated the relationship between Aβ deposition and cognition. Education, pIQ, and LCA, but not OC, showed moderating effect on the relationship between AD-signature cerebral hypometabolism and cognition. In contrast, only OC had a moderating effect on the relationship between cortical atrophy of the AD-signature regions and cognition. Such moderation effects of the CR proxies were similarly observed in CI individuals, but most of them were not in CU individuals. The findings suggest that the proposed CR proxies have different moderating effects on the relationships between specific AD pathologies and cognition.
Key findings
- For overall participants, only education moderated the relationship between Aβ deposition and cognition.
- The findings suggest that the proposed CR proxies have different moderating effects on the relationships between specific AD pathologies and cognition.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Risk factors, ranked →
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, studied in people 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 23 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 41 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Neurobiology of aging) |
| 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 | 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) |
| 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 34879329) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 23 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 23 of the 56 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.
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
Ko, K., Yi, D., Byun, M. S., Lee, J. H., Jeon, S. Y., Kim, W. J., et al. (2022). Cognitive reserve proxies, Alzheimer pathologies, and cognition. Neurobiology of aging. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2021.10.005
Vancouver
Ko K, Yi D, Byun MS, Lee JH, Jeon SY, Kim WJ, et al. Cognitive reserve proxies, Alzheimer pathologies, and cognition. Neurobiology of aging. 2022. doi:10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2021.10.005. PMID: 34879329.
BibTeX
@article{ko2022-34879329,
author = {Ko, Kang and Yi, Dahyun and Byun, Min Soo and Lee, Jun Ho and Jeon, So Yeon and Kim, Woo Jin and Byeon, Gihwan and Sung, Kiyoung and others},
title = {{Cognitive reserve proxies, Alzheimer pathologies, and cognition}},
journal = {Neurobiology of aging},
year = {2022},
doi = {10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2021.10.005},
pmid = {34879329},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2021.10.005}
}
Related studies in Risk factors
Also tagged “reserve”
208 studies in the library carry the topic tag “reserve”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 208 tagged studies.