ArticleBMJ open2024
Characterising and differentiating cognitive and motor speed in older adults: structural equation modelling on a UK longitudinal birth cohort.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Towards a speech-based digital biomarker for cognitive impairment: speech as a proxy for cognitive assessment.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesInformation processing speed (IPS) has been proposed to be a key component in healthy ageing and cognitive functioning. Yet, current studies lack a consistent definition and specific influential characteristics. This study aimed to investigate IPS as a multifaceted concept by differentiating cognitive and motor IPS. DESIGN, SETTING AND
participantsA retrospective data analysis using data from the Medical Research Council National Survey of Health and Development (a population-based cohort of UK adults born in 1946) at childhood (ages 8, 11 and 15) and adulthood (ages 60-64 and 68-70). Using structural equation modelling, we constructed two models of IPS with 2124 and 1776 participants, respectively. OUTCOME MEASURES: Measures of interest included IPS (ie, letter cancellation, simple and choice reaction time), intelligence (ie, childhood intelligence and National Adult Reading Test), verbal memory, socioeconomic status (SES) and cognitive functions measured by the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination III, as well as a variety of health indexes.
resultsWe found distinct predictors for cognitive and motor IPS and how they relate to other cognitive functions in old age. In our first model, SES and antipsychotic medication usage emerged as significant predictors for cognitive IPS, intelligence and smoking as predictors for motor IPS while both share sex, memory and antiepileptic medication usage as common predictors. Notably, all differences between both IPS types ran in the same direction except for sex differences, with women performing better than men in cognitive IPS and vice versa in motor IPS. The second model showed that both IPS measures, as well as intelligence, memory, antipsychotic and sedative medication usage, explain cognitive functions later in life.
conclusionTaken together, these results shed further light on IPS as a whole by showing there are distinct types and that these measures directly relate to other cognitive functions.
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.