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.

67/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 67 out of 100. Drug development

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

Plain-language summary

Objective To examine the relation of statins to incident Alzheimer disease (AD) and change in cognition and neuropathology. Methods Participants were 929 older Catholic clergy (68.7% women, mean baseline age 74.9 years, education 18.2 years, Mini-Mental State Examination 28.5) free of dementia, enrolled in the Religious Orders Study, a longitudinal clinical-pathologic study of AD. All agreed to brain autopsy at time of death and underwent annual structured clinical evaluations, allowing for classification of AD and assessment of cognition (based on 19 neuropsychological tests). Statins were identified by direct medication inspection. Neuropathologic data were available on 262 participants. All macroscopic chronic cerebral infarctions were recorded. A measure of global AD pathology was derived from silver stain, and separate measures of amyloid and tangles were based on immunohistochemistry. We examined the relation of statins to incident AD using Cox proportional hazards, change in cognition using mixed effects models, and pathologic indices using logistic and linear regression. Results Statin use at baseline (12.8%) was not associated with incident AD (191 persons, up to 12 follow-up years), change in global cognition, or five separate cognitive domains (all p values > 0.20). Statin use any time prior to death (17.9%) was not related to global AD pathology. Persons taking statins were less likely to have amyloid (p = 0.02). However, among those with amyloid, there was no relation of statins to amyloid load. Statins were not related to tangles or infarction. Conclusions Overall, statins were not related to incident Alzheimer disease (AD) or change in cognition, or continuous measures of AD pathology or infarction.

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

APA 7th

Arvanitakis, Z., Schneider, J. A., Wilson, R. S., Bienias, J. L., Kelly, J. F., Evans, D. A., et al. (2008). Statins, incident Alzheimer disease, change in cognitive function, and neuropathology. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/01.wnl.0000288181.00826.63

Vancouver

Arvanitakis Z, Schneider JA, Wilson RS, Bienias JL, Kelly JF, Evans DA, et al. Statins, incident Alzheimer disease, change in cognitive function, and neuropathology. Neurology. 2008. doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000288181.00826.63. PMID: 18199831.

BibTeX

@article{arvanitakis2008-18199831,
  author  = {Arvanitakis, Z. and Schneider, J. A. and Wilson, R. S. and Bienias, J. L. and Kelly, J. F. and Evans, D. A. and Bennett, D. A.},
  title   = {{Statins, incident Alzheimer disease, change in cognitive function, and neuropathology}},
  journal = {Neurology},
  year    = {2008},
  doi     = {10.1212/01.wnl.0000288181.00826.63},
  pmid    = {18199831},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1212/01.wnl.0000288181.00826.63}
}

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.

How to read this study

Design: this is a follow-up (cohort) study. People are observed over time and not assigned to anything, so an association can reflect other differences between groups. Look at how long follow-up lasted, how many dropped out, and whether the authors adjusted for age, education and other health conditions.
Size: the record lists 262 participants. Ask whether that is enough for the question, and who they were.
Effect: the record reports “68.7%; 12.8%; 17.9%”. A statistically significant result can still be small in daily life.

What the evidence grade means here

This page is graded moderate. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. Moderate means the abstract mentions a cohort, case-control or longitudinal design. It can add at most 5 of the 100 points in the study score, and it is a label about design, not a verdict on whether the findings are true.

New to reading papers? Six questions to ask of any Alzheimer’s study · how we score.

Key findings

Results Statin use at baseline (12.8%) was not associated with incident AD (191 persons, up to 12 follow-up years), change in global cognition, or five separate cognitive domains (all p values > 0.20).
Conclusions Overall, statins were not related to incident Alzheimer disease (AD) or change in cognition, or continuous measures of AD pathology or infarction.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →

Study details

Study designlongitudinal study
Participants262
Effect size68.7%; 12.8%; 17.9%
Evidence strengthModerate

How this study scored 67/100

Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a longitudinal study following the same people over time. Scored zero for randomized / 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 multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 39 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 67 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	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	1 / 5	2008 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	2 / 4	262 participants
Effect reported	2 / 3	Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test
Studied in people	3 / 3	Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomized / blinded	0 / 2	No randomization 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
Multicenter collaboration	— / 3	Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 18199831)
Free to read	0 / 2	Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points	39 / 58	Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 39 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 67 out of 100.
Total	67 / 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 Drug development from nearby years

Also tagged “neuropathology”

7 studies in the library carry the topic tag “neuropathology”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 7 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Drug development

See all studies in Drug development →