Home › Research › Hippocampus size on brain scans
Olfactory identification deficits and MCI in a multi-ethnic elderly community sample
Devanand DP, Tabert MH, Cuasay K, Manly JJ, Schupf N, Brickman AM, Andrews H, Brown TR et al.. Neurobiology of aging, 2008-10-28
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Odor identification deficits occur in Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and predict clinical conversion from MCI to AD. In an epidemiologic study conducted in a multi-ethnic community elderly sample (average 80 years old), the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT, range 0-40) was administered to 1092 non-demented subjects. Women (mean 26.6, S.D. 6.6) scored higher than men (mean 24.4, S.D. 7.4, p<.02), and ethnic differences were not significant after controlling for age and education. UPSIT scores correlated inversely with age (r=-0.24, p<.0001) and positively with Selective Reminding Test immediate recall (r=0.33), delayed recall (r=0.28), category fluency (r=0.28) and the 15-item Boston Naming Test (r=0.23), all ps<.0001. In a sub-sample in which MRI was done, UPSIT scores showed a significant correlation with hippocampal volume (n=571, r=0.16, p<.001) but not entorhinal cortex volume nor total number of white matter hyperintensities. In ANOVA, UPSIT scores differed (p<.0001) as a function of MCI classification: no MCI (mean 26.6, S.D. 6.8), non-amnestic MCI (mean 24.4, S.D. 7.2), and amnestic MCI (mean 23.5, S.D. 6.7). The difference between amnestic MCI and no MCI remained significant after controlling for relevant covariates. These findings indicate that the predictive utility of olfactory identification deficits for decline from no MCI to MCI and AD needs to be assessed in longitudinal studies of elderly community samples.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Devanand, D. P., Tabert, M. H., Cuasay, K., Manly, J. J., Schupf, N., Brickman, A. M., et al. (2010). Olfactory identification deficits and MCI in a multi-ethnic elderly community sample. Neurobiology of aging. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2008.09.008
Vancouver
Devanand DP, Tabert MH, Cuasay K, Manly JJ, Schupf N, Brickman AM, et al. Olfactory identification deficits and MCI in a multi-ethnic elderly community sample. Neurobiology of aging. 2010. doi:10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2008.09.008. PMID: 18963256.
BibTeX
@article{devanand2010-18963256,
author = {Devanand, D. P. and Tabert, M. H. and Cuasay, K. and Manly, J. J. and Schupf, N. and Brickman, A. M. and Andrews, H. and Brown, T. R. and others},
title = {{Olfactory identification deficits and MCI in a multi-ethnic elderly community sample}},
journal = {Neurobiology of aging},
year = {2010},
doi = {10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2008.09.008},
pmid = {18963256},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2008.09.008}
}
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.
Key findings
- Women (mean 26.6, S.D. 6.6) scored higher than men (mean 24.4, S.D. 7.4, p<.02), and ethnic differences were not significant after controlling for age and education.
- In a sub-sample in which MRI was done, UPSIT scores showed a significant correlation with hippocampal volume (n=571, r=0.16, p<.001) but not entorhinal cortex volume nor total number of white matter hyperintensities.
- The difference between amnestic MCI and no MCI remained significant after controlling for relevant covariates.
- These findings indicate that the predictive utility of olfactory identification deficits for decline from no MCI to MCI and AD needs to be assessed in longitudinal studies of elderly community samples.
Study details
- Study designlongitudinal study
- Participants571
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 60/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a longitudinal study following the same people over time. Scored zero for 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 and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 35 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 60 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Neurobiology of aging) |
| 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 | 1 / 5 | 2010 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 571 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 18963256) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 35 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 35 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 60 out of 100. |
| Total | 60 / 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 Hippocampus size on brain scans
Also tagged “disorder”
492 studies in the library carry the topic tag “disorder”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 492 tagged studies.