Home › Research › Risk factors
Occupational complexity and cognition in the FINGER multidomain intervention trial
Anders Rydström, Alexander Darin-Mattsson, Ingemar Kåreholt, Tiia Ngandu, Jenni Lehtisalo, Alina Solomon, Riitta Antikainen, Lars Bäckman et al.. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 2022-02-09
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
Higher levels of occupational complexity were associated with better baseline cognition. Measures of occupational complexity had no association with intervention effects on cognition, except for occupational complexity with data, which was associated with the degree of intervention-related gains for executive function. In older adults at increased risk for dementia, higher occupational complexity is associated with better cognition. The cognitive benefit of the FINGER intervention did not vary significantly among participants with different levels of occupational complexity. These exploratory findings require further testing in larger studies.
Key findings
- Higher levels of occupational complexity were associated with better baseline cognition.
- Measures of occupational complexity had no association with intervention effects on cognition, except for occupational complexity with data, which was associated with the degree of intervention-related gains for executive function.
- In older adults at increased risk for dementia, higher occupational complexity is associated with better cognition.
- The cognitive benefit of the FINGER intervention did not vary significantly among participants with different levels of occupational complexity.
- These exploratory findings require further testing in larger studies.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Risk factors, ranked →
Study details
- Participants1,026
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 55/100
Published in a leading specialty 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 31 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 55 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association) |
| 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 | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 3 / 5 | 2022 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 3 / 4 | 1,026 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 35142055) |
| 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. 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.
APA 7th
Rydström, A., Darin-Mattsson, A., Kåreholt, I., Ngandu, T., Lehtisalo, J., Solomon, A., et al. (2022). Occupational complexity and cognition in the FINGER multidomain intervention trial. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.12561
Vancouver
Rydström A, Darin-Mattsson A, Kåreholt I, Ngandu T, Lehtisalo J, Solomon A, et al. Occupational complexity and cognition in the FINGER multidomain intervention trial. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. 2022. doi:10.1002/alz.12561. PMID: 35142055.
BibTeX
@article{rydstrom2022-35142055,
author = {Rydström, Anders and Darin-Mattsson, Alexander and Kåreholt, Ingemar and Ngandu, Tiia and Lehtisalo, Jenni and Solomon, Alina and Antikainen, Riitta and Bäckman, Lars and others},
title = {{Occupational complexity and cognition in the FINGER multidomain intervention trial}},
journal = {Alzheimer's \& dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association},
year = {2022},
doi = {10.1002/alz.12561},
pmid = {35142055},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.12561}
}
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.