Home › Research › Risk factors
Impact of occupational complexity on cognitive decline in the oldest-old
Bahia Hakiki, Silvia Pancani, Emilio Portaccio, Raffaello Molino-Lova, Francesco Sofi, Claudio Macchi, Francesca Cecchi. Aging & mental health, 2020-04-07
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
Neither work complexity (p = 0.995) nor work duration (p = 0.701) showed a significant effect on the likelihood of presenting a lower cognitive profile or developing dementia (p = 0.385 and p = 0.096, for work complexity and work duration, respectively). In the observed sample of oldest-old individuals, cognitive decline did not seem to be influenced by cognitive reserve as assessed through the evaluation of cognitive status and level of independence. It is conceivable that in this population, the decline of the brain reserve has a preponderant role in the definition of the cognitive profile.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Hakiki, B., Pancani, S., Portaccio, E., Molino-Lova, R., Sofi, F., Macchi, C., et al. (2021). Impact of occupational complexity on cognitive decline in the oldest-old. Aging & mental health. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2020.1746739
Vancouver
Hakiki B, Pancani S, Portaccio E, Molino-Lova R, Sofi F, Macchi C, et al. Impact of occupational complexity on cognitive decline in the oldest-old. Aging & mental health. 2021. doi:10.1080/13607863.2020.1746739. PMID: 32252551.
BibTeX
@article{hakiki2021-32252551,
author = {Hakiki, Bahia and Pancani, Silvia and Portaccio, Emilio and Molino-Lova, Raffaello and Sofi, Francesco and Macchi, Claudio and Cecchi, Francesca},
title = {{Impact of occupational complexity on cognitive decline in the oldest-old}},
journal = {Aging \& mental health},
year = {2021},
doi = {10.1080/13607863.2020.1746739},
pmid = {32252551},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2020.1746739}
}
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 names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Neither work complexity (p = 0.995) nor work duration (p = 0.701) showed a significant effect on the likelihood of presenting a lower cognitive profile or developing dementia (p = 0.385 and p = 0.096, for work complexity and work duration, respectively).
- In the observed sample of oldest-old individuals, cognitive decline did not seem to be influenced by cognitive reserve as assessed through the evaluation of cognitive status and level of independence.
- It is conceivable that in this population, the decline of the brain reserve has a preponderant role in the definition of the cognitive profile.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Risk factors, ranked →
Study details
- Participants392
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 54/100
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 30 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 54 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Aging & mental health) |
| 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 | 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 | 3 / 5 | 2021 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 392 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 32252551) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 30 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 30 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 54 out of 100. |
| Total | 54 / 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.
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.