Home › Research › Risk factors
Defining Cognitive Reserve and Implications for Cognitive Aging
Corinne Pettigrew, Anja Soldan. Current neurology and neuroscience reports, 2019-01-09
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The aim of this review is to summarize current conceptual models of cognitive reserve (CR) and related concepts and to discuss evidence for these concepts within the context of aging and Alzheimer's disease. RECENT FINDINGS: Evidence to date supports the notion that higher levels of CR, as measured by proxy variables reflective of lifetime experiences, are associated with better cognitive performance, and with a reduced risk of incident mild cognitive impairment/dementia. However, the impact of CR on longitudinal cognitive trajectories is unclear and may be influenced by a number of factors. Although there is promising evidence that some proxy measures of CR may influence structural brain measures, more research is needed. The protective effects of CR may provide an important mechanism for preserving cognitive function and cognitive well-being with age, in part because it can be enhanced throughout the lifespan. However, more research on the mechanisms by which CR is protective is needed.
Key findings
- RECENT FINDINGS: Evidence to date supports the notion that higher levels of CR, as measured by proxy variables reflective of lifetime experiences, are associated with better cognitive performance, and with a reduced risk of incident mild cognitive impairment/dementia.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Risk factors, ranked →
Study details
- Study designlongitudinal study
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 55/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a longitudinal study following the same people over time. Scored zero for 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 31 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 55 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Current neurology and neuroscience reports) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 7 / 12 | A longitudinal study following the same people over time |
| Strength of evidence | 3 / 5 | Rated “moderate” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 2 / 5 | 2019 — within 10 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 30627880) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 31 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 31 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 55 out of 100. |
| Total | 55 / 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
Pettigrew, C., & Soldan, A. (2019). Defining Cognitive Reserve and Implications for Cognitive Aging. Current neurology and neuroscience reports. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11910-019-0917-z
Vancouver
Pettigrew C, Soldan A. Defining Cognitive Reserve and Implications for Cognitive Aging. Current neurology and neuroscience reports. 2019. doi:10.1007/s11910-019-0917-z. PMID: 30627880.
BibTeX
@article{pettigrew2019-30627880,
author = {Pettigrew, Corinne and Soldan, Anja},
title = {{Defining Cognitive Reserve and Implications for Cognitive Aging}},
journal = {Current neurology and neuroscience reports},
year = {2019},
doi = {10.1007/s11910-019-0917-z},
pmid = {30627880},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s11910-019-0917-z}
}
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.