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 47 out of 100. Disparities

Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment

Some studies have suggested that people with a high educational level have a lower risk of developing dementia compared to people with a low educational level. This protective effect of education has been explained by the constitution of a cognitive reserve which might delay the cognitive and functional expression of neurodegenerative illnesses. The aim of this study is, on the one hand, to evaluate the impact of education on cognitive functioning, which is thought to support the cognitive reserve capacity, and on the other, to determine the extent to which cognitive functioning is affected by other explanatory variables. The analysis was conducted on 1022 individuals without physical or neurological disorders in the Personnes Ages Quid study. These participants were aged 66 and over and had completed a neuropsychological battery. The effect of some demographic and socioeconomic variables on cognitive performance was also analyzed. Multivariate analysis showed a significant effect of education on most neuropsychological performances, independently of the other variables, and more particularly, in the high-attention-demanding tests. A principal component analysis demonstrated that education specifically increases 2 cognitive components: controlled processes and conceptualization ability. More-over, mental stimulation occurring after the education years, such as high-complex-activity occupations, seems to increase the controlled component. All these results suggest that the effect of education on cognitive reserve may be explained by an in-crease in controlled processes and conceptualization abilities. These 2 cognitive components might delay the clinical expression of neurodegenerative illnesses by maintaining global cognitive efficiency. Of these 2 components, controlled processes were also influenced by high attention-demanding occupations.

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

APA 7th

Le Carret, N., Lafont, S., Letenneur, L., Dartigues, J., Mayo, W., & Fabrigoule, C. (2003). The Effect of Education on Cognitive Performances and Its Implication for the Constitution of the Cognitive Reserve. Developmental Neuropsychology. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326942dn2303_1

Vancouver

Le Carret N, Lafont S, Letenneur L, Dartigues J, Mayo W, Fabrigoule C. The Effect of Education on Cognitive Performances and Its Implication for the Constitution of the Cognitive Reserve. Developmental Neuropsychology. 2003. doi:10.1207/s15326942dn2303_1. PMID: 12740188.

BibTeX

@article{lecarret2003-12740188,
  author  = {Le Carret, Nicolas and Lafont, Sylviane and Letenneur, Luc and Dartigues, Jean‐François and Mayo, Willy and Fabrigoule, Colette},
  title   = {{The Effect of Education on Cognitive Performances and Its Implication for the Constitution of the Cognitive Reserve}},
  journal = {Developmental Neuropsychology},
  year    = {2003},
  doi     = {10.1207/s15326942dn2303_1},
  pmid    = {12740188},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326942dn2303_1}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 47/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 3 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 27 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 47 of 100. Total 47 of 100.27 of the 58 points we could judge = 47 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, 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 27 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 47 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Developmental Neuropsychology)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
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 2003 — older than 20 years, still counted
Sample size 3 / 4 1,022 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 12740188)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 27 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 27 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 47 out of 100.
Total 47 / 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 Disparities

Also tagged “reserve”

208 studies in the library carry the topic tag “reserve”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 208 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Disparities

See all studies in Disparities →