Home › Research › Risk factors
Predictors of cognitive and functional progression in patients with probable Alzheimer's disease
James A. Mortimer, Brenda Ebbitt, Sung-Pyo Jun, Michael D. Finch. Neurology, 1992-09-01
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
We followed 65 patients with probable Alzheimer's disease, who were initially mildly to moderately impaired, with semiannual assessments of cognitive and functional performance for up to 4 years. Scores on the Mini Mental State Examination and a combination of instrumental and self-maintenance scale of activities of daily living were regressed on time of examination (measured in 6-month increments) to estimate cognitive and functional progression rates in individual patients. Lower scores on the verbal neuropsychological tests at the time of study entry, more aggressive behavior, and sleep disturbance during the first year of observation predicted faster cognitive progression. Faster functional progression was predicted by paranoid behavior, hallucinations and activity disturbances during the first year and the presence of extrapyramidal signs and lower scores on nonverbal neuropsychological tests at the time of entry into the study. Hallucinations occurred independently of cognitive severity and may identify a distinct subgroup of patients with rapid functional progression. Because of the greater significance of functional progression for caregivers' ability to manage patients, the presence of specific behavior problems early in the disease course may help to identify individuals who will experience greater functional decline and be at risk for earlier institutionalization.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Mortimer, J. A., Ebbitt, B., Jun, S.-P., & Finch, M. D. (1992). Predictors of cognitive and functional progression in patients with probable Alzheimer's disease. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.42.9.1689
Vancouver
Mortimer JA, Ebbitt B, Jun S.-P, Finch MD. Predictors of cognitive and functional progression in patients with probable Alzheimer's disease. Neurology. 1992. doi:10.1212/wnl.42.9.1689. PMID: 1513455.
BibTeX
@article{mortimer1992-1513455,
author = {Mortimer, James A. and Ebbitt, Brenda and Jun, Sung-Pyo and Finch, Michael D.},
title = {{Predictors of cognitive and functional progression in patients with probable Alzheimer's disease}},
journal = {Neurology},
year = {1992},
doi = {10.1212/wnl.42.9.1689},
pmid = {1513455},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.42.9.1689}
}
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
- Scores on the Mini Mental State Examination and a combination of instrumental and self-maintenance scale of activities of daily living were regressed on time of examination (measured in 6-month increments) to estimate cognitive and functional progression rates in individual patients.
- Lower scores on the verbal neuropsychological tests at the time of study entry, more aggressive behavior, and sleep disturbance during the first year of observation predicted faster cognitive progression.
- Faster functional progression was predicted by paranoid behavior, hallucinations and activity disturbances during the first year and the presence of extrapyramidal signs and lower scores on nonverbal neuropsychological tests at the time of entry into the study.
- Hallucinations occurred independently of cognitive severity and may identify a distinct subgroup of patients with rapid functional progression.
- Because of the greater significance of functional progression for caregivers' ability to manage patients, the presence of specific behavior problems early in the disease course may help to identify individuals who will experience greater functional decline and be at risk for earlier institutionalization.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Risk factors, ranked →
Study details
- Participants65
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 47/100
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 and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 27 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 47 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | 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 | 1992 — older than 20 years, still counted |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 65 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 1513455) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 27 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 27 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 47 out of 100. |
| Total | 47 / 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 Risk factors
Also in Risk factors
356 studies in the library are filed under Risk factors with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Risk factors hub.