Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

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.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100. Mild cognitive impairment

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

This text discusses the characterisation of subjective cognitive decline (SCD), a term conceived in 2014 to describe cognitively unimpaired individuals who are concerned about reduced cognitive function and seek medical help. Epidemiological data show that individuals with SCD have an increased risk for mild cognitive impairment and dementia. However, the majority of individuals with SCD will not show progressive cognitive decline.

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

APA 7th

Jessen, F., Amariglio, R. E., Buckley, R. F., van der Flier, W. M., Han, Y., Molinuevo, J. L., et al. (2020). The characterisation of subjective cognitive decline. The Lancet Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1474-4422(19)30368-0

Vancouver

Jessen F, Amariglio RE, Buckley RF, van der Flier WM, Han Y, Molinuevo JL, et al. The characterisation of subjective cognitive decline. The Lancet Neurology. 2020. doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(19)30368-0. PMID: 31958406.

BibTeX

@article{jessen2020-31958406,
  author  = {Jessen, Frank and Amariglio, Rebecca England and Buckley, Rachel F. and van der Flier, Wiesje M. and Han, Ying and Molinuevo, José Luís and Rabin, Laura A. and Rentz, Dorene M. and Rodríguez‐Gómez, Octavio and Saykin, Andrew J. and Sikkes, Sietske A.M. and Smart, Colette M. and Wolfsgruber, Steffen and Wagner, Michael},
  title   = {{The characterisation of subjective cognitive decline}},
  journal = {The Lancet Neurology},
  year    = {2020},
  doi     = {10.1016/s1474-4422(19)30368-0},
  pmid    = {31958406},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1016/s1474-4422(19)30368-0}
}

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 14 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

Why it matters

Discusses the characterisation of subjective cognitive decline.

How this study scored 62/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 9 of 10; Journal's citation record 3 of 4; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence left out, no data; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 2 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 7 of 7; Citations per year 5 of 5; Impact for its field and year 6 of 6; Cited by studies here 0 of 6; Still being cited 4 of 4; Senior author's track record 3 of 4; Institution's track record 3 of 3; Multi-centre collaboration 3 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 2 of 2. 59 of the 95 points it could be judged on, which is 62 of 100. Total 62 of 100.59 of the 95 points we could judge = 62 of 100

Published in a leading specialty 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 strength of evidence, so that was left out: it earned 59 of the 95 points we could judge it on, which is 62 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 9 / 10 Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (The Lancet Neurology)
Journal's citation record 3 / 4 The Lancet Neurology: journal h-index 457 (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 — / 5 No evidence rating recorded — left out of this score
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 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 / 7 Cited 1,383 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 5 / 5 172.9 citations a year over 8 year(s) since 2020
Impact for its field and year 6 / 6 Cited 103.8× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 0 / 6 No other study in this library cites it
Still being cited 4 / 4 Cited 732 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record 3 / 4 Last-listed author Michael Wagner: h-index 93 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record 3 / 3 Harvard University: institution h-index 3,235 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration 3 / 3 OpenAlex lists 29 institution(s) in 7 countries
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 31958406)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 59 / 95 Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 59 of the 95 points we could judge it on is 62 out of 100.
Total 62 / 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).

Related studies in Mild cognitive impairment

Also tagged “examination”

840 studies in the library carry the topic tag “examination”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 840 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Mild cognitive impairment

See all studies in Mild cognitive impairment →