Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37684556›Full record

ReviewBMC geriatrics2023

Systematic examination of methodological inconsistency in operationalizing cognitive reserve and its impact on identifying predictors of late-life cognition.

Kerry A Howard, Lauren Massimo, Sarah F Griffin, Ryan J Gagnon, Lu Zhang, Lior Rennert

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC geriatrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kerry A HowardDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Clemson University, Clemson, SC, 29634, USA. khowar7@clemson.edu.
Lauren MassimoDepartment of Neurology, Penn Frontotemporal Degeneration Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Sarah F GriffinDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Clemson University, Clemson, SC, 29634, USA.
Ryan J GagnonDepartment of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management, Clemson University, Clemson, SC, USA.
Lu ZhangDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Clemson University, Clemson, SC, 29634, USA.
Lior RennertDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Clemson University, Clemson, SC, 29634, USA. liorr@clemson.edu.
Clemson University · USUniversity of Pennsylvania · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCognitive reserve (CR) is the ability to maintain cognitive performance despite brain pathology. CR is built through lifecourse experiences (e.g., education) and is a key construct in promoting healthy aging. However, the operationalization of CR and its estimated association with late-life cognition varies. The purpose of this study was to systematically examine the operationalization of CR and the relationship between its operationalization and late-life cognition.

methodsWe performed a comprehensive review of experiences (proxies) used to operationalize CR. The review informed quantitative analyses using data from 1366 participants of the Memory and Aging Project to examine 1) relationships between proxies and 2) the relationship between operationalization and late-life cognition. We also conducted a factor analysis with all identified CR experiences to create a composite lifecourse CR score. Generalized linear mixed models examined the relationship between operationalizations and global cognition, with secondary outcomes of five domains of cognition to examine consistency.

resultsBased on a review of 753 articles, we found the majority (92.3%) of the 28 commonly used proxies have weak to no correlation between one another. There was substantial variability in the association between operationalizations and late-life global cognition (median effect size: 0.99, IQR: 0.34 to 1.39). There was not strong consistency in the association between CR operationalizations and the five cognitive domains (mean consistency: 56.1%). The average estimate for the 28 operationalizations was 0.91 (SE = 0.48), compared to 2.48 (SE = 0.40) for the lifecourse score and it was associated with all five domains of cognition.

conclusionsInconsistent methodology is theorized as a major limitation of CR research and barrier to identification of impactful experiences for healthy cognitive aging. Based on the weak associations, it is not surprising that the relationship between CR and late-life cognition is dependent on the experience used to operationalize CR. Scores using multiple experiences across the lifecourse may help overcome such limitations. Adherence to a lifecourse approach and collaborative movement towards a consensus operationalization of CR are imperative shifts in the study of CR that can better inform research on risk factors related to cognitive decline and ultimately aid in the promotion of healthy aging.

Indexed as

Cognitive DysfunctionCognitive ReserveAgingCognitionHumansResearch DesignAgingCognitive AgingCognitive ReserveMethodologyOperationalization

Identifiers

PMID37684556
PMCPMC10492336
OpenAlexW4386531962

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.