Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34748154›Full record

SynthesisNeuropsychology review2022

Subjective Cognitive Decline: Level of Risk for Future Dementia and Mild Cognitive Impairment, a Meta-Analysis of Longitudinal Studies.

Kerryn E Pike, Marina G Cavuoto, Lily Li, Bradley J Wright, Glynda J Kinsella

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Neuropsychology review, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 140 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
140citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

140 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Development and Validation of a Predictive Model for Identification of Cognitive Impairment Risk in Older Adults with Subjective Cognitive Decline：A Longitudinal Study.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Metacognition and metacognitive monitoring in aging.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

80 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

5 authors.

Kerryn E PikeSchool of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Melbourne, VIC, 3086, Australia. k.pike@latrobe.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-0474-1215
Marina G CavuotoSchool of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Melbourne, VIC, 3086, Australia.
Lily LiSchool of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Melbourne, VIC, 3086, Australia.
Bradley J WrightSchool of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Melbourne, VIC, 3086, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6428-9128
Glynda J KinsellaSchool of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Melbourne, VIC, 3086, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5859-0934

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Subjective Cognitive Decline (SCD) in older adults has been identified as a risk factor for dementia, although the literature is inconsistent, and it is unclear which factors moderate progression from SCD to dementia. Through separate meta-analyses, we aimed to determine if SCD increased the risk of developing dementia or mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Furthermore, we examined several possible moderators. Longitudinal studies of participants with SCD at baseline, with data regarding incident dementia or MCI, were extracted from MEDLINE and PsycINFO. Articles were excluded if SCD occurred solely in the context of dementia, MCI, or as part of a specific disease. Pooled estimates were calculated using a random-effects model, with moderator analyses examining whether risk varied according to SCD definition, demographics, genetics, recruitment source, and follow-up duration. Risk of study bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS)-2 tool. 46 studies with more than 74,000 unique participants were included. SCD was associated with increased risk of developing dementia (HR = 1.90, 95% CI 1.52-2.36; OR = 2.48, 95% CI 1.97-3.14) and MCI (HR = 1.73, 95% CI 1.18-2.52; OR = 1.83, 95% CI 1.56-2.16). None of the potential moderating factors examined influenced the HR or OR of developing dementia. In contrast, including worry in the definition of SCD, younger age, and recruitment source impacted the OR of developing MCI, with clinic samples demonstrating highest risk. SCD thus represents an at-risk phase, ideal for early intervention, with further research required to identify effective interventions for risk reduction, and cognitive-behavioural interventions for cognitive management. PROSPERO, protocol number: CRD42016037993.

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseaseCognitive DysfunctionAgedDisease ProgressionHumansLongitudinal StudiesNeuropsychological TestsAlzheimer’s diseaseDementiaMemory complaintsMild cognitive impairmentRisk factorsSubjective memory changes

Identifiers

PMID34748154

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.