Home › Research › Risk factors
Quality of Education and Late-Life Cognitive Function in a Population-Based Sample From Puerto Rico
Cheyanne Barba, Alberto Garcia, Olivio J Clay, Virginia G Wadley, Ross Andel, Ana Luisa Dávila, Michael Crowe. Innovation in aging, 2021-05-09
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
Quality of education was positively correlated with both educational attainment and cognitive performance. Independent of years of education, literacy, childhood economic hardship, and adult economic hardship, compared to participants in the lowest quartile of education quality, those in the highest quartile had significantly better baseline cognitive performance (β = 0.09, p < .001). Quality of education did not consistently show an association with change in cognitive function over 4 years. Literacy and greater educational attainment were each independently associated with better cognitive function at baseline and less cognitive decline. DISCUSSION AND Quality of education, literacy, and years of education, while interrelated, also show independent associations with cognitive functioning in older Puerto Ricans. The downstream factors of literacy and years of education were more closely related to age-related cognitive decline than quality of education.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Barba, C., Garcia, A., Clay, O. J., Wadley, V. G., Andel, R., Dávila, A. L., et al. (2021). Quality of Education and Late-Life Cognitive Function in a Population-Based Sample From Puerto Rico. Innovation in aging. https://doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igab016
Vancouver
Barba C, Garcia A, Clay OJ, Wadley VG, Andel R, Dávila AL, et al. Quality of Education and Late-Life Cognitive Function in a Population-Based Sample From Puerto Rico. Innovation in aging. 2021. doi:10.1093/geroni/igab016. PMID: 34169152.
BibTeX
@article{barba2021-34169152,
author = {Barba, Cheyanne and Garcia, Alberto and Clay, Olivio J and Wadley, Virginia G and Andel, Ross and Dávila, Ana Luisa and Crowe, Michael},
title = {{Quality of Education and Late-Life Cognitive Function in a Population-Based Sample From Puerto Rico}},
journal = {Innovation in aging},
year = {2021},
doi = {10.1093/geroni/igab016},
pmid = {34169152},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igab016}
}
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 names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Quality of education was positively correlated with both educational attainment and cognitive performance.
- Independent of years of education, literacy, childhood economic hardship, and adult economic hardship, compared to participants in the lowest quartile of education quality, those in the highest quartile had significantly better baseline cognitive performance (β = 0.09, p < .001).
- Quality of education did not consistently show an association with change in cognitive function over 4 years.
- Literacy and greater educational attainment were each independently associated with better cognitive function at baseline and less cognitive decline.
- DISCUSSION AND Quality of education, literacy, and years of education, while interrelated, also show independent associations with cognitive functioning in older Puerto Ricans.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Risk factors, ranked →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 41/100
Published in a peer-reviewed 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 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, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 23 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 41 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Innovation in aging) |
| 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 | 3 / 5 | 2021 — within 6 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 | — / 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 34169152) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 23 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 23 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 41 out of 100. |
| Total | 41 / 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 tagged “reserve”
208 studies in the library carry the topic tag “reserve”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 208 tagged studies.