ArticleBMC geriatrics2024
Study on the age-period-cohort effects of cognitive abilities among older Chinese adults based on the cognitive reserve hypothesis.
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 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association of dietary patterns with the prevalence of rheumatic diseases among older Chinese adults: a national cross-sectional survey.Clinical rheumatology · 2026Article
- Trajectories of cognitive ability and attitudes toward own aging in older adults: a conditional parallel latent growth model.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Childhood adversities and the exposome in dementia risk and brain health.Current opinion in psychiatry · 2026Review
- The dynamic association between physical exercise and depressive symptoms in China: an age-period-cohort analysis using the HAPC-CCREM and the moderating role of urban-rural disparities.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Association between spouse health and cognitive function in older Chinese adults: a moderated mediation of frailty and activity engagement.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- Association between housework frequency and cognitive impairment among Chinese older adults: a prospective cohort study based on CLHLS.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Association between subjective well-being and the risk of cardiovascular diseases among older adults: evidence from the Chinese longitudinal healthy longevity survey.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- Global, regional and national temporal trends in incidence and mortality of non-Hodgkin lymphoma from 1992 to 2021: an age-period-cohort analysis.Annals of hematology · 2025Article
- Age-period-cohort analysis of dietary sodium, potassium, and sodium-to-potassium ratio in Korea.Epidemiology and 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCognitive abilities serves as a critical indicator of healthy aging. As China progresses into a stage of advanced population aging, there has been a significant increase in the number of elderly individuals experiencing age-related cognitive decline. Despite this demographic shift, there is a paucity of longitudinal research examining cognitive abilities among older Chinese adults over extended time periods. This study aims to investigate changes in cognitive abilities and explore group differences among older Chinese adults aged 65 to 110 years, employing a multidimensional temporal approach that encompasses age, period, and birth cohort effects.
methodsThis study utilizes data from eight waves of the Chinese Longitudinal Healthy Longevity Survey (CLHLS), spanning from 1998 to 2018. The dataset comprises 94,116 observations from 36,157 unique participants. Cognitive abilities are assessed using Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores as a proxy measure. To address the issue of perfect collinearity in the temporal dimension, the study employs the Hierarchical Age-Period-Cohort Cross-Classified Random Effects Model (HAPC-CCREM). This model allows for the examination of age effects, period effects, and cohort effects on cognitive abilities among older Chinese adults. In the model specification, age is treated as a fixed effect, while period and birth cohort are incorporated as random effects. Drawing upon the cognitive reserve hypothesis, the study investigates significant factors influencing cognitive abilities in this population.
resultsAt the fixed-effect level, demographic factors, health behaviors, self-rated health, subjective well-being, and childhood adversity significantly influence cognitive abilities among older Chinese adults. The age effects are significant, with cognitive abilities exhibiting an inverted U-shaped curve across the lifespan. At the random-effect level, period effects are significant, revealing a gradual annual increase in overall cognitive levels among older Chinese adults since 2008. Cohort effects are also significant, demonstrating an increasing trend in overall cognitive levels for the earlier-born cohorts in the first six groups. Conversely, later-born cohorts in the latter five groups show a declining trend in overall cognitive levels. Notably, period effects significantly enhance cohort effects.
conclusionsThe cognitive reserve hypothesis supports the significance of the majority of identified influencing factors. Cognitive abilities demonstrate an accelerating decline with increasing age, following an evolutionary trajectory consistent with physiological principles among older Chinese adults. Since 2008, cognitive abilities have shown a monotonic increasing trend annually, further validating the Flynn effect in this population. The cognitive abilities of the six earlier-born cohorts exhibit an increasing trend, supporting the compression of morbidity hypothesis. Conversely, the cognitive abilities of the five later-born cohorts show a declining trend, supporting the expansion of morbidity hypothesis. These findings collectively contribute to our understanding of cognitive aging patterns and their underlying mechanisms among older Chinese adults.
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.