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.

52/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. Mild cognitive impairment

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Plain-language summary

Research increasingly suggests that subjective cognitive decline (SCD) in older adults, in the absence of objective cognitive dysfunction or depression, may be a harbinger of non-normative cognitive decline and eventual progression to dementia. Little is known, however, about the key features of self-report measures currently used to assess SCD. The Subjective Cognitive Decline Initiative (SCD-I) Working Group is an international consortium established to develop a conceptual framework and research criteria for SCD (Jessen et al., 2014, Alzheimers Dement 10, 844-852). In the current study we systematically compared cognitive self-report items used by 19 SCD-I Working Group studies, representing 8 countries and 5 languages. We identified 34 self-report measures comprising 640 cognitive self-report items. There was little overlap among measures- approximately 75% of measures were used by only one study. Wide variation existed in response options and item content. Items pertaining to the memory domain predominated, accounting for about 60% of items surveyed, followed by executive function and attention, with 16% and 11% of the items, respectively. Items relating to memory for the names of people and the placement of common objects were represented on the greatest percentage of measures (56% each). Working group members reported that instrument selection decisions were often based on practical considerations beyond the study of SCD specifically, such as availability and brevity of measures. Results document the heterogeneity of approaches across studies to the emerging construct of SCD. We offer preliminary recommendations for instrument selection and future research directions including identifying items and measure formats associated with important clinical outcomes.

What this study adds

Evidence grade: Low

This overview compared self-report measures of subjective cognitive decline across 19 international studies and found wide variation and little overlap among measures. It documents the heterogeneity of approaches to this emerging concept and offers preliminary recommendations, but reports no treatment or cure.

Taken from this record’s own fields, not from reading the paper. The grade is assigned from the abstract’s wording; what that means.

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

APA 7th

Rabin, L. A., Smart, C. M., Crane, P. K., Amariglio, R. E., Berman, L. M., Boada, M., et al. (2015). Subjective Cognitive Decline in Older Adults: An Overview of Self-Report Measures Used Across 19 International Research Studies. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD. https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-150154

Vancouver

Rabin LA, Smart CM, Crane PK, Amariglio RE, Berman LM, Boada M, et al. Subjective Cognitive Decline in Older Adults: An Overview of Self-Report Measures Used Across 19 International Research Studies. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD. 2015. doi:10.3233/jad-150154. PMID: 26402085.

BibTeX

@article{rabin2015-26402085,
  author  = {Rabin, L. A. and Smart, C. M. and Crane, P. K. and Amariglio, R. E. and Berman, L. M. and Boada, M. and Buckley, R. F. and Chételat, G. and others},
  title   = {{Subjective Cognitive Decline in Older Adults: An Overview of Self-Report Measures Used Across 19 International Research Studies}},
  journal = {Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD},
  year    = {2015},
  doi     = {10.3233/jad-150154},
  pmid    = {26402085},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-150154}
}

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.

How to read this study

Design: our record does not state a study design, so check the methods section of the original before weighing the result.
Size: the record gives no participant count. Look for one in the original before trusting a pattern.
Effect: the record gives no effect size, so the summary above cannot say how large any difference was.

What the evidence grade means here

This page is graded low. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. Low means the abstract matched neither pattern. It is the default label, and it does not mean the work is poor; many sound lab and imaging papers land here. 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

Research increasingly suggests that subjective cognitive decline (SCD) in older adults, in the absence of objective cognitive dysfunction or depression, may be a harbinger of non-normative cognitive decline and eventual progression to dementia.
Results document the heterogeneity of approaches across studies to the emerging construct of SCD.
We offer preliminary recommendations for instrument selection and future research directions including identifying items and measure formats associated with important clinical outcomes.

Why it matters

Study details

Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 52/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD)
Journal's citation record	2 / 4	Journal of Alzheimer s Disease: journal h-index 218 (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	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)
Randomized / blinded	0 / 2	No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited	6 / 7	Cited 463 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	4 / 5	35.6 citations a year over 13 year(s) since 2015
Impact for its field and year	5 / 6	Cited 20.6× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	3 / 6	Cited by 12 other studies in this library
Still being cited	3 / 4	Cited 114 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	2 / 4	Last-listed author Sietske A.M. Sikkes: h-index 47 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record	3 / 3	University of Washington: institution h-index 3,540 (OpenAlex)
Multicenter collaboration	3 / 3	OpenAlex lists 41 institution(s) in 7 countries
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 26402085)
Free to read	0 / 2	Behind a paywall — scores zero
Total	52 / 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).

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

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here. Showing 12 of 28.

Later studies that cite this one

12 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references. Showing the 8 highest-scoring.

Related studies in Mild cognitive impairment 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 Mild cognitive impairment

See all studies in Mild cognitive impairment →