Home › Research › Risk factors
Coronary artery disease and neurocognitive performance among older adults in Uganda
Migisha R, Lombardi J, Byakika-Kibwika P, Nakasujja N, Maling S, Kangwagye P, Muhwezi A, Longenecker CT et al.. Research Square, 2026-09-10
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
Results Among 512 participants, mean age was 57.9 years (SD, 6.3), 252 (49.2%) were female, 238 (46.5%) were people with HIV (PWH), 42 (8.2%) had CAD, and 203 (39.6%) had ASCVD risk > 5%. CAD was not associated with global cognition (b = 0.093 SD units; 95% CI, − 0.122 to 0.308; P = 0.397). At individual-test level, CAD was associated with poorer performance on Color Trails 2 (a measure of executive function) (b = 0.502; 95% CI, 0.184 to 0.821; P = 0.002; q = 0.026) and nominally associated with poorer performance on Digits Forward (a measure of attention and immediate verbal span) (b = 0.386; 95% CI, 0.028 to 0.744; P = 0.035; q = 0.210). In HIV-stratified analyses, CAD was nominally associated with poorer Digits Forward performance among PWOH (b = 0.552; P = 0.006; q = 0.070) and poorer Color Trails 2 performance among PWH (b = 0.646; P = 0.010; q = 0.121), but neither survived FDR correction and interaction tests did not support effect modification. ASCVD risk > 5% was nominally associated with poorer learning-and-memory domain performance (b = 0.188; 95% CI, 0.026 to 0.350; P = 0.023; q = 0.116) and poorer WHO/UCLA AVLT total recall (b = 0.231; 95% CI, 0.048 to 0.414; P = 0.014; q = 0.162); neither survived FDR correction. Conclusion CAD was not associated with global or domain-level neurocognitive performance.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Migisha, R., Lombardi, J., Byakika-Kibwika, P., Nakasujja, N., Maling, S., Kangwagye, P., et al. (2026). Coronary artery disease and neurocognitive performance among older adults in Uganda. Research Square. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-10737115/v1
Vancouver
Migisha R, Lombardi J, Byakika-Kibwika P, Nakasujja N, Maling S, Kangwagye P, et al. Coronary artery disease and neurocognitive performance among older adults in Uganda. Research Square. 2026. doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-10737115/v1.
BibTeX
@article{migisha2026-35cfce36,
author = {Migisha, R. and Lombardi, J. and Byakika-Kibwika, P. and Nakasujja, N. and Maling, S. and Kangwagye, P. and Muhwezi, A. and Longenecker, C. T. and others},
title = {{Coronary artery disease and neurocognitive performance among older adults in Uganda}},
journal = {Research Square},
year = {2026},
doi = {10.21203/rs.3.rs-10737115/v1},
url = {https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-10737115/v1}
}
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
- Results Among 512 participants, mean age was 57.9 years (SD, 6.3), 252 (49.2%) were female, 238 (46.5%) were people with HIV (PWH), 42 (8.2%) had CAD, and 203 (39.6%) had ASCVD risk > 5%.
- CAD was not associated with global cognition (b = 0.093 SD units; 95% CI, − 0.122 to 0.308; P = 0.397).
- At individual-test level, CAD was associated with poorer performance on Color Trails 2 (a measure of executive function) (b = 0.502; 95% CI, 0.184 to 0.821; P = 0.002; q = 0.026) and nominally associated with poorer performance on Digits Forward (a measure of attention and immediate verbal span) (b = 0.386; 95% CI, 0.028 to 0.744; P = 0.035; q = 0.210).
- In HIV-stratified analyses, CAD was nominally associated with poorer Digits Forward performance among PWOH (b = 0.552; P = 0.006; q = 0.070) and poorer Color Trails 2 performance among PWH (b = 0.646; P = 0.010; q = 0.121), but neither survived FDR correction and interaction tests did not support effect modification.
- ASCVD risk > 5% was nominally associated with poorer learning-and-memory domain performance (b = 0.188; 95% CI, 0.026 to 0.350; P = 0.023; q = 0.116) and poorer WHO/UCLA AVLT total recall (b = 0.231; 95% CI, 0.048 to 0.414; P = 0.014; q = 0.162); neither survived FDR correction.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Risk factors, ranked →
Study details
- Study designcohort study
- Participants512
- Effect size49.2%; 46.5%; 8.2%
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 16/100
Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. It scored 47 on the same rubric, but non-peer-reviewed sources are capped at 16, so it shows as 16. Scored zero for randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on 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 29 of the 62 points we could judge it on, which is 47 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 2 / 10 | Tier 4 — not a peer-reviewed journal (Research Square) |
| Journal's citation record | 0 / 4 | Not a journal article, so the journal's record does not count |
| Study design | 7 / 12 | A cohort study following people over time |
| Strength of evidence | 3 / 5 | Rated “moderate” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 4 / 10 | Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. Hosted on a preprint server. |
| How recent | 5 / 5 | 2026 — within 1 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 512 participants |
| Effect reported | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| 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 | 1 / 2 | Not in PubMed, but has a DOI |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 29 / 62 | Scored on 12 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 29 of the 62 points we could judge it on is 47 out of 100. |
| Total | 47 / 100 | Capped to 16 because this is not a peer-reviewed article. |
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 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.