Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
Repetitive negative thinking is associated with amyloid, tau, and cognitive decline
Marchant NL, Lovland LR, Jones R, Pichet Binette A, Gonneaud J, Arenaza-Urquijo EM, Chételat G, Villeneuve S et al.. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 2020-06-07
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Introduction The Cognitive Debt hypothesis proposes that repetitive negative thinking (RNT), a modifiable process common to many psychological risk factors for Alzheimer's disease (AD) may itself increase risk. We sought to empirically examine relationships between RNT and markers of AD, compared with anxiety and depression symptoms. Methods Two hundred and ninety-two older adults with longitudinal cognitive assessments, including 113 with amyloid-positron emission tomography (PET) and tau-PET scans, from the PREVENT-AD cohort and 68 adults with amyloid-PET scans from the IMAP+ cohort were included. All participants completed RNT, anxiety, and depression questionnaires. Results RNT was associated with decline in global cognition (P = .02); immediate (P = .03) and delayed memory (P = .04); and global amyloid (PREVENT-AD: P = .01; IMAP+: P = .03) and entorhinal tau (P = .02) deposition. Relationships remained after adjusting for potential confounders. Discussion RNT was associated with decline in cognitive domains affected early in AD and with neuroimaging AD biomarkers. Future research could investigate whether modifying RNT reduces AD risk.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Marchant, N. L., Lovland, L. R., Jones, R., Pichet Binette, A., Gonneaud, J., Arenaza-Urquijo, E. M., et al. (2020). Repetitive negative thinking is associated with amyloid, tau, and cognitive decline. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.12116
Vancouver
Marchant NL, Lovland LR, Jones R, Pichet Binette A, Gonneaud J, Arenaza-Urquijo EM, et al. Repetitive negative thinking is associated with amyloid, tau, and cognitive decline. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. 2020. doi:10.1002/alz.12116. PMID: 32508019.
BibTeX
@article{marchant2020-32508019,
author = {Marchant, N. L. and Lovland, L. R. and Jones, R. and Pichet Binette, A. and Gonneaud, J. and Arenaza-Urquijo, E. M. and Chételat, G. and Villeneuve, S. and others},
title = {{Repetitive negative thinking is associated with amyloid, tau, and cognitive decline}},
journal = {Alzheimer's \& dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association},
year = {2020},
doi = {10.1002/alz.12116},
pmid = {32508019},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.12116}
}
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
- We sought to empirically examine relationships between RNT and markers of AD, compared with anxiety and depression symptoms.
- Results RNT was associated with decline in global cognition (P = .02); immediate (P = .03) and delayed memory (P = .04); and global amyloid (PREVENT-AD: P = .01; IMAP+: P = .03) and entorhinal tau (P = .02) deposition.
- Discussion RNT was associated with decline in cognitive domains affected early in AD and with neuroimaging AD biomarkers.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Study designlongitudinal study
- Participants68
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 64/100
Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a longitudinal study following the same people over time. Scored zero for 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 37 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 64 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 7 / 12 | A longitudinal study following the same people over time |
| Strength of evidence | 3 / 5 | Rated “moderate” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 2 / 5 | 2020 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 68 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 32508019) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 37 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 37 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 64 out of 100. |
| Total | 64 / 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 Brain scans and imaging
Also tagged “amyloid-tau”
4 studies in the library carry the topic tag “amyloid-tau”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 4 tagged studies.