Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38279076›Full record

ReviewIntegrative psychological & behavioral science2024

Cognition and Cognitive Reserve.

Anisha Savarimuthu, R Joseph Ponniah

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Integrative psychological & behavioral science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Repeated plasma p-tau217 measurements to monitor clinical progression heterogeneity.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

2 authors.

Anisha SavarimuthuDepartment of Humanities and Social Sciences, National Institute of Technology, Tiruchirappalli, India.
R Joseph PonniahDepartment of Humanities and Social Sciences, National Institute of Technology, Tiruchirappalli, India. joseph@nitt.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cognition is a mental process that provides the ability to think, know, and learn. Though cognitive skills are necessary to do daily tasks and activities, cognitive aging causes changes in various cognitive functions. Cognitive abilities that are preserved and strengthened by experience can be kept as a reserve and utilized when necessary. The concept of reserving cognition was found when people with Alzheimer's disease had differences in clinical manifestations and cognitive functions. The cognitive reserve builds resilience against cognitive decline and improves the quality of life. Also, several lines of studies have found that the plasticity between neurons has a significant impact on cognitive reserve and acts against cognitive decline. To extend the findings, the present study provides a comprehensive understanding of cognitive reserve and the variables that are involved in maintaining cognition. The study also considers reading as one of the cognitive proxies that develops and maintains cognitive reserve.

Indexed as

CognitionCognitive ReserveAgingAlzheimer DiseaseCognitive AgingCognitive DysfunctionHumansReadingBrain ReserveCognitive DevelopmentCognitive ReserveNeuroplasticityReading

Identifiers

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.