Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 74 out of 100. Vascular contributions

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Plain-language summary

Objective To investigate progression of MRI-assessed manifestations of cerebral degeneration related to cognitive changes in a population of elderly patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) compared to age-matched control subjects. Methods From a randomized controlled trial (PROSPER study), a study sample of 89 patients with DM and 438 control subjects without DM aged 70-82 years were included for brain MRI scanning and cognitive function testing at baseline and reexamination after 3 years. Changes in brain atrophy, white matter hyperintensities (WMHs), number of infarctions, and cognitive function test results were determined in patients with DM and subjects without DM. Linear regression analysis was performed with correction for age, gender, hypertension, pravastatin treatment, educational level, and baseline test results. In patients with DM, baseline MRI parameters were correlated with change in cognitive function test result using linear regression analysis with covariates age and gender. Results Patients with DM showed increased progression of brain atrophy (p < 0.01) after follow-up compared to control subjects. No difference in progression of WMH volume or infarctions was found. Patients with DM showed increased decline in cognitive performance on Stroop Test (p = 0.04) and Picture Learning Test (p = 0.03). Furthermore, in patients with DM, change in Picture Learning Test was associated with baseline brain atrophy (p < 0.02). Conclusion Our data show that elderly patients with DM without dementia have accelerated progression of brain atrophy with significant consequences in cognition compared to subjects without DM. Our findings add further evidence to the hypothesis that diabetes exerts deleterious effects on neuronal integrity.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

van Elderen, S. G., de Roos, A., de Craen, A. J., Westendorp, R. G., Blauw, G. J., Jukema, J. W., et al. (2010). Progression of brain atrophy and cognitive decline in diabetes mellitus: a 3-year follow-up. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0b013e3181f25f06

Vancouver

van Elderen SG, de Roos A, de Craen AJ, Westendorp RG, Blauw GJ, Jukema JW, et al. Progression of brain atrophy and cognitive decline in diabetes mellitus: a 3-year follow-up. Neurology. 2010. doi:10.1212/wnl.0b013e3181f25f06. PMID: 20837967.

BibTeX

@article{vanelderen2010-20837967,
  author  = {van Elderen, S. G. and de Roos, A. and de Craen, A. J. and Westendorp, R. G. and Blauw, G. J. and Jukema, J. W. and Bollen, E. L. and Middelkoop, H. A. and others},
  title   = {{Progression of brain atrophy and cognitive decline in diabetes mellitus: a 3-year follow-up}},
  journal = {Neurology},
  year    = {2010},
  doi     = {10.1212/wnl.0b013e3181f25f06},
  pmid    = {20837967},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0b013e3181f25f06}
}

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

Study details

How this study scored 74/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 9 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 11 of 12; Strength of evidence 5 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 1 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomized / blinded 1 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multicenter collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 43 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 74 of 100. Total 74 of 100.43 of the 58 points we could judge = 74 of 100

Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a randomized controlled trial. Scored zero for effect reported 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 multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 43 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 74 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
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 11 / 12 A randomized controlled trial
Strength of evidence 5 / 5 Rated “high” 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 1 / 4 89 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)
Randomized / blinded 1 / 2 Randomized (as stated in the record)
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
Multicenter collaboration — / 3 Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 20837967)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 43 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 43 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 74 out of 100.
Total 74 / 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.

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Related studies in Vascular contributions from nearby years

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.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Vascular contributions

See all studies in Vascular contributions →