Home › Research › Digital health tools
Prediction of brain age suggests accelerated atrophy after traumatic brain injury
Cole JH, Leech R, Sharp DJ, Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative.. Annals of neurology, 2015-04-01
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Objective The long-term effects of traumatic brain injury (TBI) can resemble observed in normal ageing, suggesting that TBI may accelerate the ageing process. We investigate this using a neuroimaging model that predicts brain age in healthy individuals and then apply it to TBI patients. We define individuals' differences in chronological and predicted structural "brain age," and test whether TBI produces progressive atrophy and how this relates to cognitive function. Methods A predictive model of normal ageing was defined using machine learning in 1,537 healthy individuals, based on magnetic resonance imaging-derived estimates of gray matter (GM) and white matter (WM). This ageing model was then applied to test 99 TBI patients and 113 healthy controls to estimate brain age. Results The initial model accurately predicted age in healthy individuals (r = 0.92). TBI brains were estimated to be "older," with a mean predicted age difference (PAD) between chronological and estimated brain age of 4.66 years (±10.8) for GM and 5.97 years (±11.22) for WM. This PAD predicted cognitive impairment and correlated strongly with the time since TBI, indicating that brain tissue loss increases throughout the chronic postinjury phase. Interpretation TBI patients' brains were estimated to be older than their chronological age. This discrepancy increases with time since injury, suggesting that TBI accelerates the rate of brain atrophy. This may be an important factor in the increased susceptibility in TBI patients for dementia and other age-associated conditions, motivating further research into the age-like effects of brain injury and other neurological diseases.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Cole, J. H., Leech, R., Sharp, D. J., & Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. (2015). Prediction of brain age suggests accelerated atrophy after traumatic brain injury. Annals of neurology. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.24367
Vancouver
Cole JH, Leech R, Sharp DJ, Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. Prediction of brain age suggests accelerated atrophy after traumatic brain injury. Annals of neurology. 2015. doi:10.1002/ana.24367. PMID: 25623048.
BibTeX
@article{cole2015-25623048,
author = {Cole, J. H. and Leech, R. and Sharp, D. J. and {Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative}},
title = {{Prediction of brain age suggests accelerated atrophy after traumatic brain injury}},
journal = {Annals of neurology},
year = {2015},
doi = {10.1002/ana.24367},
pmid = {25623048},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.24367}
}
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
- Objective The long-term effects of traumatic brain injury (TBI) can resemble observed in normal ageing, suggesting that TBI may accelerate the ageing process.
- Results The initial model accurately predicted age in healthy individuals (r = 0.92).
- This discrepancy increases with time since injury, suggesting that TBI accelerates the rate of brain atrophy.
Why it matters
An MRI model trained on 1,537 healthy adults to estimate "brain age" (r = 0.92 with real age) judged the brains of 99 people with traumatic brain injury to be older than their years, on average by 4.66 years for gray matter and 5.97 years for white matter, with wide individual variation (±10.8 and ±11.22 years). This gap was larger in people further from their injury and went with poorer cognition, which the authors read as TBI speeding up brain tissue loss. It is an association study: it did not test any treatment and did not measure Alzheimer's disease itself.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Digital health →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 52/100
Published in a leading specialty journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on senior author's track record, so that was left out: it earned 50 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 52 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Annals of neurology) |
| Journal's citation record | 3 / 4 | Annals of Neurology: journal h-index 437 (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 | 2015 — 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 | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | 6 / 7 | Cited 457 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 4 / 5 | 35.2 citations a year over 13 year(s) since 2015 |
| Impact for its field and year | 4 / 6 | Cited 13.4× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 3 / 6 | Cited by 10 other studies in this library |
| Still being cited | 3 / 4 | Cited 132 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 | 2 / 3 | Imperial College London: institution h-index 1,744 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 0 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 1 institution(s) in 1 country — scores zero (affiliation lists can be incomplete) |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 25623048) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 50 / 96 | Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 50 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 52 out of 100. |
| Total | 52 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.
Later studies that cite this one
10 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references. Showing the 8 highest-scoring.
Related studies in Digital health tools
Also tagged “controlled”
1,116 studies in the library carry the topic tag “controlled”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,116 tagged studies.