Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36098447›Full record

ArticleRevista de neurologia2022

[Cognitive reserve. A proposal for a new conceptual hypothesis].

E Calderón-Rubio, P Uréndez-Serrano, A Martínez-Nicolás, J Tirapu-Ustárroz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Revista de neurologia, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

E Calderón-RubioUniversitat Jaume I, 12080 Castelló de la Plana, España.
P Uréndez-SerranoCentre de Teràpia Interfamiliar, Alicante, España.
A Martínez-NicolásCentro Aupsi. Salud Mental del Niño y Adolescente, Alicante, España.
J Tirapu-UstárrozHospital San Juan de Dios, Pamplona, España.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionCurrently, there is a lack of consensus on the definition of the concept of cognitive reserve, the elements that make it up and the relationship between them, despite the notable increase in the number of studies conducted on the subject. MATERIALS AND

methodsA multi-domain conceptual model with two factors is proposed: general reserve and domain-specific reserve. The domain-specific reserve, in turn, would be divided into four areas: cognitive, behavioural, emotional and social.

resultsThe proposed model seems to provide a more comprehensive explanation of the construct, with new elements of study to be taken into consideration.

conclusionsThis proposal aims to introduce a new perspective into the study of cognitive reserve and to open up new lines of clinical and academic research with the aim of demonstrating its feasibility.

Indexed as

Cognitive ReserveHumans

Identifiers

PMID36098447
PMCPMC10280754

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.