ArticleExperimental gerontology2026
Harmonization of late-life participation in cognitively stimulating activities across four cohort studies of cognitive aging.
Article in Experimental gerontology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWe harmonized self-reported survey data measuring late-life participation in cognitively stimulating activities across four cohort studies of cognitive aging.
methodsData came from the Rush Memory and Aging Project (MAP), the Minority Aging Research Study (MARS), the Rush ADRC Clinical Core (Clinical Core), and the Religious Orders Study (ROS) in individuals free of dementia at baseline. We used an item-banking approach that leverages all available items assessing cognitively stimulating activities, including items common and unique across studies. We generated harmonized factors to summarize an individual's cognitive activity. We then validated the harmonized factor by testing its association with incident AD dementia, cognitive decline, and cognitive resilience i.e. cognitive decline after adjusting for common ADRD pathologic indices.
resultsWe included 4550 participants (MAP = 1977; MARS = 825; Clinical Core = 366; ROS = 1382); 75% were female, mean baseline age was 76.9 years (SD = 7.6) and mean education was 16 years (SD = 3.7). Confirmatory factor analysis models fit the data well in each study (comparative fit index ≥ 0.90, root mean square error of approximation ≤ 0.08, and standardized root mean residual ≤ 0.08). The harmonized factor score was associated with incident AD dementia (HR = 0.80, 95%CI = 0.74-0.86, p < 0.001), cognitive decline (est. = 0.005, SE = 0.002, p = 0.02), and cognitive resilience (est. = 0.011, SE = 0.004, p = 0.003).
conclusionWe statistically harmonized survey data measuring frequency of participation in cognitive activities across four studies of aging and subsequently validated the harmonized latent trait by linking it to ADRD outcomes. Findings demonstrate the utility of combining self-reported psychosocial survey data collected across multiple studies to thoroughly evaluate the impact of modifiable risk factors on later-life cognitive outcomes in heterogeneous populations.
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.