Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27110937›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Cognitive Test Scores in UK Biobank: Data Reduction in 480,416 Participants and Longitudinal Stability in 20,346 Participants.

Donald M Lyall, Breda Cullen, Mike Allerhand, Daniel J Smith, Daniel Mackay, Jonathan Evans, Jana Anderson, Chloe Fawns-Ritchie, Andrew M McIntosh, Ian J Deary and 1 more

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 171 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
171citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

171 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Donald M LyallInstitute of Health & Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Breda CullenInstitute of Health & Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Mike AllerhandCentre for Cognitive Ageing and Cognitive Epidemiology, Department of Psychology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Daniel J SmithInstitute of Health & Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Daniel MackayInstitute of Health & Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Jonathan EvansInstitute of Health & Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Jana AndersonInstitute of Health & Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Chloe Fawns-RitchieInstitute of Health & Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Andrew M McIntoshCentre for Cognitive Ageing and Cognitive Epidemiology, Department of Psychology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Ian J DearyCentre for Cognitive Ageing and Cognitive Epidemiology, Department of Psychology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Jill P PellInstitute of Health & Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/F019394/1Medical Research Council G0700704Medical Research Council MC_QA137853Medical Research Council MR/K026992/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

UK Biobank includes 502,649 middle- and older-aged adults from the general population who have undergone detailed phenotypic assessment. The majority of participants completed tests of cognitive functioning, and on average four years later a sub-group of N = 20,346 participants repeated most of the assessment. These measures will be used in a range of future studies of health outcomes in this cohort. The format and content of the cognitive tasks were partly novel. The aim of the present study was to validate and characterize the cognitive data: to describe the inter-correlational structure of the cognitive variables at baseline assessment, and the degree of stability in scores across longitudinal assessment. Baseline cognitive data were used to examine the inter-correlational/factor-structure, using principal components analysis (PCA). We also assessed the degree of stability in cognitive scores in the subsample of participants with repeat data. The different tests of cognitive ability showed significant raw inter-correlations in the expected directions. PCA suggested a one-factor solution (eigenvalue = 1.60), which accounted for around 40% of the variance. Scores showed varying levels of stability across time-points (intraclass correlation range = 0.16 to 0.65). UK Biobank cognitive data has the potential to be a significant resource for researchers looking to investigate predictors and modifiers of cognitive abilities and associated health outcomes in the general population.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBiological Specimen BanksCognitionCognition DisordersFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedMultifactor Dimensionality ReductionPrincipal Component AnalysisPsychological TestsUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID27110937
PMCPMC4844168

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.