ArticleJournal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology2014
Cognitively elite, cognitively normal, and cognitively impaired aging: neurocognitive status and stability moderate memory performance.
Article in Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Modifiable Risk Factors Discriminate Memory Trajectories in Non-Demented Aging: Precision Factors and Targets for Promoting Healthier Brain Aging and Preventing Dementia.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2019Article
- Two Behavioral Tests Allow a Better Correlation Between Cognitive Function and Expression of Synaptic Proteins.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2018Article
- APOE and COMT polymorphisms are complementary biomarkers of status, stability, and transitions in normal aging and early mild cognitive impairment.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2014Article
- Word Recall: Cognitive Performance Within Internet Surveys.JMIR mental healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveAlthough recent theories of brain and cognitive aging distinguish between normal, exceptional, and impaired groups, further empirical evidence is required. We adapted and applied standard procedures for classifying groups of cognitively impaired (CI) and cognitively normal (CN) older adults to a third classification: cognitively healthy, exceptional, or elite (CE) aging. We then examined concurrent and two-wave longitudinal performance on composite variables of episodic, semantic, and working memory.
methodWe began with a two-wave source sample from the Victoria Longitudinal Study (VLS; source n = 570; baseline age = 53-90 years). The goals were to: (a) apply standard and objective classification procedures to discriminate three cognitive status groups, (b) conduct baseline comparisons of memory performance, (c) develop two-wave status stability and change subgroups, and (d) compare of stability subgroup differences in memory performance and change.
resultsAs expected, the CE group performed best on all three memory composites. Similarly, expected status stability effects were observed: (a) stable CE and CN groups performed memory tasks better than their unstable counterparts, and (b) the stable (and chronic) CI group performed worse than its unstable (variable) counterpart. These stability group differences were maintained over two waves.
conclusionNew data validate the expectations that (a) objective clinical classification procedures for cognitive impairment can be adapted for detecting cognitively advantaged older adults, and (b) performance in three memory systems is predictably related to the tripartite classification.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.