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 78 out of 100. Brain scans and imaging

Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment

Objective We conducted a meta-analysis of relationships between amyloid burden and cognition in cognitively normal, older adult humans. Methods Methods of assessing amyloid burden included were CSF or plasma assays, histopathology, and PET ligands. Cognitive domains examined were episodic memory, executive function, working memory, processing speed, visuospatial function, semantic memory, and global cognition. Sixty-four studies representing 7,140 subjects met selection criteria, with 3,495 subjects from 34 studies representing independent cohorts. Weighted effect sizes were obtained for each study. Primary analyses were conducted limiting to independent cohort studies using only the most common assessment method (Pittsburgh compound B). Exploratory analyses included all assessment methods. Results Episodic memory (r = 0.12) had a significant relationship to amyloid burden. Executive function and global cognition did not have significant relationships to amyloid in the primary analysis of Pittsburgh compound B (r = 0.05 and r = 0.08, respectively), but did when including all assessment methods (r = 0.08 and r = 0.09, respectively). The domains of working memory, processing speed, visuospatial function, and semantic memory did not have significant relationships to amyloid. Differences in the method of amyloid assessment, study design (longitudinal vs cross-sectional), or inclusion of control variables (age, etc.) had little influence. Conclusions Based on this meta-analytic survey of the literature, increased amyloid burden has small but nontrivial associations with specific domains of cognitive performance in individuals who are currently cognitively normal. These associations may be useful for identifying preclinical Alzheimer disease or developing clinical outcome measures.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 78/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 9 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 12 of 12; Strength of evidence 5 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 3 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 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. 45 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 78 of 100. Total 78 of 100.45 of the 58 points we could judge = 78 of 100

Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a meta-analysis pooling many studies. Scored zero for 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 45 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 78 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 9 / 10 Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Neurology)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 12 / 12 A meta-analysis pooling many studies
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 3 / 4 7,140 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 A review of other studies — randomisation is not credited here
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 23547267)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 45 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 45 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 78 out of 100.
Total 78 / 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

Hedden, T., Oh, H., Younger, A. P., & Patel, T. A. (2013). Meta-analysis of amyloid-cognition relations in cognitively normal older adults. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0b013e31828ab35d

Vancouver

Hedden T, Oh H, Younger AP, Patel TA. Meta-analysis of amyloid-cognition relations in cognitively normal older adults. Neurology. 2013. doi:10.1212/wnl.0b013e31828ab35d. PMID: 23547267.

BibTeX

@article{hedden2013-23547267,
  author  = {Hedden, T. and Oh, H. and Younger, A. P. and Patel, T. A.},
  title   = {{Meta-analysis of amyloid-cognition relations in cognitively normal older adults}},
  journal = {Neurology},
  year    = {2013},
  doi     = {10.1212/wnl.0b013e31828ab35d},
  pmid    = {23547267},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0b013e31828ab35d}
}

Related studies in Brain scans and imaging

Similar studies

More on Brain scans and imaging

See all studies in Brain scans and imaging →