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 69 out of 100. Prevention trials

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Background The present study examined the prospective relationships between subjective fatigue, cognitive function, and everyday functioning. Methods A cohort study with secondary data analysis was conducted using data from 2,781 community-dwelling older adults without dementia who were enrolled to participate in the Advanced Cognitive Training for Independent and Vital Elderly (ACTIVE) randomized intervention trial. Measures included demographic and health information at baseline, and annual assessments of subjective fatigue, cognitive function (i.e. speed of processing, memory, and reasoning), and everyday functioning (i.e. everyday speed and everyday problem-solving) over five years. Results Four distinct classes of subjective fatigue were identified using growth mixture modeling: one group complaining fatigue "some of the time" at baseline but "most of the time" at five-year follow-up (increased fatigue), one complaining fatigue "a good bit of the time" constantly over time (persistent fatigue), one complaining fatigue "most of the time" at baseline but "some of the time" at five-year follow-up (decreased fatigue), and the fourth complaining fatigue "some of the time" constantly over time (persistent energy). All domains of cognitive function and everyday functioning declined significantly over five years; and the decline rates, but not the baseline levels, differed by the latent class of subjective fatigue. Except for the decreased fatigue class, there were different degrees of significant associations between the decline rates of subjective fatigue and all domains of cognitive function and everyday functioning in other classes of subjective fatigue. Conclusion Future interventions should address subjective fatigue when managing cognitive and functional abilities in community-dwelling older adults.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 69/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 11 of 12; Strength of evidence 5 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 1 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 0 of 2. 40 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 69 of 100. Total 69 of 100.40 of the 58 points we could judge = 69 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a randomised controlled trial. Scored zero for sample size and effect reported 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 and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 40 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 69 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (International psychogeriatrics)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 11 / 12 A randomised controlled trial (from PubMed type “Randomized Controlled Trial”)
Strength of evidence 5 / 5 Rated “high” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 1 / 5 2013 — within 20 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 3 / 3 Studied in people (pubmed indexes it as a clinical or observational study)
Randomised / blinded 1 / 2 Randomised (as stated in the record)
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 23083533)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 40 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 40 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 69 out of 100.
Total 69 / 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

Lin, F., Chen, D. G., Vance, D. E., Ball, K. K., & Mapstone, M. (2013). Longitudinal relationships between subjective fatigue, cognitive function, and everyday functioning in old age. International psychogeriatrics. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1041610212001718

Vancouver

Lin F, Chen DG, Vance DE, Ball KK, Mapstone M. Longitudinal relationships between subjective fatigue, cognitive function, and everyday functioning in old age. International psychogeriatrics. 2013. doi:10.1017/s1041610212001718. PMID: 23083533.

BibTeX

@article{lin2013-23083533,
  author  = {Lin, F. and Chen, D. G. and Vance, D. E. and Ball, K. K. and Mapstone, M.},
  title   = {{Longitudinal relationships between subjective fatigue, cognitive function, and everyday functioning in old age}},
  journal = {International psychogeriatrics},
  year    = {2013},
  doi     = {10.1017/s1041610212001718},
  pmid    = {23083533},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1017/s1041610212001718}
}

Related studies in Prevention trials

Also tagged “cognitive-function”

1,118 studies in the library carry the topic tag “cognitive-function”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,118 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Prevention trials

See all studies in Prevention trials →