Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25983035›Full record

SynthesisMolecular neurobiology2016

Education and Risk of Dementia: Dose-Response Meta-Analysis of Prospective Cohort Studies.

Wei Xu, Lan Tan, Hui-Fu Wang, Meng-Shan Tan, Lin Tan, Jie-Qiong Li, Qing-Fei Zhao, Jin-Tai Yu

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Molecular neurobiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 139 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
139citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

139 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

79 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Wei XuDepartment of Neurology, Qingdao Municipal Hospital, School of Medicine, Qingdao University, No.5 Donghai Middle Road, Qingdao, China.
Lan TanDepartment of Neurology, Qingdao Municipal Hospital, School of Medicine, Qingdao University, No.5 Donghai Middle Road, Qingdao, China. dr.tanlan@163.com.
Hui-Fu WangDepartment of Neurology, Qingdao Municipal Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Qingdao, China.
Meng-Shan TanDepartment of Neurology, Qingdao Municipal Hospital, School of Medicine, Qingdao University, No.5 Donghai Middle Road, Qingdao, China.
Lin TanDepartment of Neurology, Qingdao Municipal Hospital, College of Medicine and Pharmaceutics, Ocean University of China, Qingdao, China.
Jie-Qiong LiDepartment of Neurology, Qingdao Municipal Hospital, School of Medicine, Qingdao University, No.5 Donghai Middle Road, Qingdao, China.
Qing-Fei ZhaoDepartment of Neurology, Qingdao Municipal Hospital, School of Medicine, Qingdao University, No.5 Donghai Middle Road, Qingdao, China.
Jin-Tai YuDepartment of Neurology, Qingdao Municipal Hospital, School of Medicine, Qingdao University, No.5 Donghai Middle Road, Qingdao, China. yu-jintai@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Educational level has been regarded as one of the most widely accepted risk factors in the epidemiological studies for dementia, despite with discordant qualitative results. However, the dose-response relation between education and incident dementia was still unknown. To quantitatively evaluate the association between exposure level to high and low education and risk of dementia, we searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library up to November 2014 and references of retrieved literatures. Specific prospective cohort studies, in which educational attainment was categorized into at least three levels, were included. Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess the quality of included studies. Fifteen prospective cohort studies with 55655 for low education and eight prospective cohort studies with 20172 for high education were included. In the qualitative analysis, both low and high education showed a dose-response trend with risk of dementia and Alzheimer's disease (AD). In the quantitative analysis, the dementia risk was reduced by 7 % for per year increase in education (RR, 0.93; 95 % CI, 0.92-0.94; p for overall trend = 0.000; p for nonlinearity = 0.0643). Nonetheless, we did not find statistically significant association between per year decrease in education and dementia (RR, 1.03; 95 % CI, 0.96-1.10; p for overall trend = 0.283; p for nonlinearity = 0.0041) or AD (RR, 1.03; 95 % CI, 0.97-1.10; p for overall trend = 0.357; p for nonlinearity = 0.0022). Both low and high education showed a trend of dose-response relation with risk of dementia and AD. The dementia risk was reduced by 7 % for per year increase in education.

Indexed as

Educational StatusAlzheimer DiseaseDementiaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesPublication BiasRisk FactorsDementiaEducationMeta-analysisRisk factor

Identifiers

PMID25983035

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.