ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Practical judgment in aging: examining behavioral vulnerabilities and neurobiological correlates.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Real-world decision-making often relies on practical judgment-the ability to evaluate information, anticipate consequences, and respond in an adaptive manner. Despite its importance for preserving independence in aging, this construct is understudied in older adults without dementia. Moreover, there is a gap in knowledge about the association of objective and informant-rated measures of judgment and other variables that impact everyday functioning such as scam vulnerability and white matter integrity, given that structural white matter changes may precede objective cognitive decline. Methods: Community-dwelling older adults classified as cognitively unimpaired (CU; Results: Greater structural connectivity of the UF in right temporal-frontal and frontal-frontal regions was significantly associated with better informant-reported judgment in the overall sample. Better objective and informant-based practical judgment scores were significantly associated with lower informant-reported scam engagement. Objective and informant-rated judgment abilities were significantly worse among participants with MCI compared to CU. Conclusion: Findings highlight the value of using objective and informant sources to capture real-world judgment ability, with implications for the prevention of harmful outcomes. Our results also suggest that structural connectivity within the UF may be a promising biomarker of impaired judgment in older adults without dementia.
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.