Home › Research › Brain tissue and pathology
Pathological correlates of late-onset dementia in a multicentre, community-based population in England and Wales. Neuropathology Group of the Medical Research Council Cognitive Function and Ageing Study (MRC CFAS)
Neuropathology Group. Medical Research Council Cognitive Function and Aging Study.. Lancet (London, England), 2001-01-01
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Background We have undertaken a large unselected, community-based neuropathology study in an elderly (70-103 years) UK population in relation to prospectively evaluated dementia status. The study tests the assumption that dementing disorders as defined by current diagnostic protocols underlie this syndrome in the community at large. Methods Respondents in the Medical Research Council Cognitive Function and Ageing Study were approached for consent to examine the brain at necropsy.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Neuropathology Group. Medical Research Council Cognitive Function and Aging Study. (2001). Pathological correlates of late-onset dementia in a multicentre, community-based population in England and Wales. Neuropathology Group of the Medical Research Council Cognitive Function and Ageing Study (MRC CFAS). Lancet (London, England). https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(00)03589-3
Vancouver
Neuropathology Group. Medical Research Council Cognitive Function and Aging Study. Pathological correlates of late-onset dementia in a multicentre, community-based population in England and Wales. Neuropathology Group of the Medical Research Council Cognitive Function and Ageing Study (MRC CFAS). Lancet (London, England). 2001. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(00)03589-3. PMID: 11213093.
BibTeX
@article{study2001-11213093,
author = {{Neuropathology Group. Medical Research Council Cognitive Function and Aging Study}},
title = {{Pathological correlates of late-onset dementia in a multicentre, community-based population in England and Wales. Neuropathology Group of the Medical Research Council Cognitive Function and Ageing Study (MRC CFAS)}},
journal = {Lancet (London, England)},
year = {2001},
doi = {10.1016/s0140-6736(00)03589-3},
pmid = {11213093},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(00)03589-3}
}
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.
Key findings
- The study tests the assumption that dementing disorders as defined by current diagnostic protocols underlie this syndrome in the community at large.
- Methods Respondents in the Medical Research Council Cognitive Function and Ageing Study were approached for consent to examine the brain at necropsy.
- Dementia status was assigned by use of the automated geriatric examination for computer-assisted taxonomy algorithm.
- Neuropathological features were standardised by use of the protocol of the Consortium to Establish a Registry of Alzheimer's Disease, which assesses the severity and distribution of Alzheimer-type pathology, vascular lesions, and other potential causes of dementia.
Why it matters
This 2001 study from the MRC Cognitive Function and Ageing Study examined donated brains from an unselected community group aged 70–103 in England and Wales, to test whether the diagnostic categories then in use explain dementia 'in the community at large'. Dementia was assessed during life with the AGECAT algorithm, and brains were scored with the CERAD protocol for Alzheimer-type changes, vascular lesions and other possible causes of dementia. The text alzhub holds stops at the Methods, so this page does not include the study's results; it describes a brain-examination study, not a treatment or prevention.
Study details
- Participants209
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 63/100
Published in a top-tier journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on senior author's track record and institution's track record, so those were left out: it earned 59 of the 93 points we could judge it on, which is 63 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 10 / 10 | Tier 1 — top-tier general journal (Lancet (London, England)) |
| Journal's citation record | 4 / 4 | The Lancet: journal h-index 1,205 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| 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 | 1 / 5 | 2001 — older than 20 years, still counted |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 209 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 / 7 | Cited 1,341 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 4 / 5 | 49.7 citations a year over 27 year(s) since 2001 |
| Impact for its field and year | 5 / 6 | Cited 31.8× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 5 / 6 | Cited by 129 other studies in this library |
| Still being cited | 3 / 4 | Cited 65 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| 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 | 2 / 3 | PubMed indexes it as a multicentre study |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 11213093) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 59 / 93 | Scored on 18 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 59 of the 93 points we could judge it on is 63 out of 100. |
| Total | 63 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
May need a subscription OpenAlex found no free copy of the full text (checked 6 Feb 1020), so the publisher may charge for it. The PubMed abstract is free.
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here. Showing 12 of 13.
Later studies that cite this one
129 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references. Showing the 8 highest-scoring.
Related studies in Brain tissue and pathology
Also tagged “biobank”
1,084 studies in the library carry the topic tag “biobank”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,084 tagged studies.