ArticleBMC geriatrics2024
Association between pain interference and motoric cognitive risk syndrome in older adults: a population-based cohort study.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Longitudinal Associations of Job Demand-Control Characteristics With Objective and Subjective Cognitive Outcomes in Older Workers: The Health and Retirement Study.American journal of industrial medicine · 2025Article
- From Dual Decline to Clinical Consequences: Mechanistic Pathways and Health Outcomes of Motoric Cognitive Risk Syndrome.Aging and disease · 2025Review
- Motoric cognitive risk syndrome: A review of fall risk assessment and management strategies.World journal of psychiatry · 2025Review
- The role of the hippocampus and SLC39A8 in chronic musculoskeletal pain-induced dementia: a Mendelian randomization study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Current status and influencing factors of motor-cognitive risk syndrome in the older rural Chinese population: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesMotoric cognitive risk syndrome (MCR) is a pre-dementia condition characterized by subjective complaints in cognition and slow gait. Pain interference has previously been linked with cognitive deterioration; however, its specific relationship with MCR remains unclear. We aimed to examine how pain interference is associated with concurrent and incident MCR.
methodsThis study included older adults aged ≥ 65 years without dementia from the Health and Retirement Study. We combined participants with MCR information in 2006 and 2008 as baseline, and the participants were followed up 4 and 8 years later. The states of pain interference were divided into 3 categories: interfering pain, non-interfering pain, and no pain. Logistic regression analysis was done at baseline to examine the associations between pain interference and concurrent MCR. During the 8-year follow-up, Cox regression analysis was done to investigate the associations between pain interference and incident MCR.
resultsThe study included 7120 older adults (74.6 ± 6.7 years; 56.8% females) at baseline. The baseline prevalence of MCR was 5.7%. Individuals with interfering pain had a significantly increased risk of MCR (OR = 1.51, 95% CI = 1.17-1.95; p = 0.001). The longitudinal analysis included 4605 participants, and there were 284 (6.2%) MCR cases on follow-up. Participants with interfering pain at baseline had a higher risk for MCR at 8 years of follow-up (HR = 2.02, 95% CI = 1.52-2.69; p < 0.001).
conclusionsOlder adults with interfering pain had a higher risk for MCR versus those with non-interfering pain or without pain. Timely and adequate management of interfering pain may contribute to the prevention and treatment of MCR and its associated adverse outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.