Home › Research › Mild cognitive impairment
Self-rated and informant-rated everyday function in comparison to objective markers of Alzheimer's disease
Rueda AD, Lau KM, Saito N, Harvey D, Risacher SL, Aisen PS, Petersen RC, Saykin AJ et al.. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 2014-11-15
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
It is recognized that individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) already demonstrate difficulty in aspects of daily functioning, which predicts disease progression. This study examined the relationship between self- versus informant-report of functional ability, and how those reports relate to objective disease measures across the disease spectrum (i.e. cognitively normal, MCI, Alzheimer's disease). A total of 1080 subjects with self- and/or informant-rated Everyday Cognition questionnaires were included. Objective measures included cognitive functioning, structural brain atrophy, cerebrospinal fluid abnormalities, and a marker of amyloid deposition using positron emission tomography with [18F]AV45 (florbetapir). Overall, informant-report was consistently more associated with objective markers of disease than self-report although self-reported functional status may still have some utility in early disease.
Key findings
- This study examined the relationship between self- versus informant-report of functional ability, and how those reports relate to objective disease measures across the disease spectrum (i.e. cognitively normal, MCI, Alzheimer's disease).
- Overall, informant-report was consistently more associated with objective markers of disease than self-report although self-reported functional status may still have some utility in early disease.
Why it matters
This study found that informant reports of everyday function were more closely associated with objective markers of Alzheimer's disease than self-reports. The findings are about assessing functional ability and do not report on treating, curing, or preventing Alzheimer's disease.
Study details
- Participants1,080
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 53/100
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 senior author's track record, so that was left out: it earned 51 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 53 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 | 2 / 4 | Alzheimer s & Dementia: journal h-index 228 (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 | 3 / 4 | 1,080 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 | 5 / 7 | Cited 127 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 3 / 5 | 9.8 citations a year over 13 year(s) since 2015 |
| Impact for its field and year | 3 / 6 | Cited 3.8× 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 | 2 / 4 | Cited 40 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 | University of California San Diego: institution h-index 1,852 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 2 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 6 institution(s) in 1 country |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 25449531) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 51 / 96 | Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 51 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 53 out of 100. |
| Total | 53 / 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).
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
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.
APA 7th
Rueda, A. D., Lau, K. M., Saito, N., Harvey, D., Risacher, S. L., Aisen, P. S., et al. (2015). Self-rated and informant-rated everyday function in comparison to objective markers of Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2014.09.002
Vancouver
Rueda AD, Lau KM, Saito N, Harvey D, Risacher SL, Aisen PS, et al. Self-rated and informant-rated everyday function in comparison to objective markers of Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. 2015. doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2014.09.002. PMID: 25449531.
BibTeX
@article{rueda2015-25449531,
author = {Rueda, A. D. and Lau, K. M. and Saito, N. and Harvey, D. and Risacher, S. L. and Aisen, P. S. and Petersen, R. C. and Saykin, A. J. and others},
title = {{Self-rated and informant-rated everyday function in comparison to objective markers of Alzheimer's disease}},
journal = {Alzheimer's \& dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association},
year = {2015},
doi = {10.1016/j.jalz.2014.09.002},
pmid = {25449531},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2014.09.002}
}
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here. Showing 12 of 18.
Later studies that cite this one
10 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references. Showing the 8 highest-scoring.