ArticleGeroScience2026
Identifying cognitive subgroups in older adults from community data with hierarchical cluster analysis.
Article in GeroScience, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study applied Ward's hierarchical clustering to detailed neuropsychological data from a community-recruited sample of 180 older adults to identify naturally occurring cognitive subgroups and characterize multidomain cognitive heterogeneity beyond conventional mild cognitive impairment (MCI) criteria. Twenty-two demographically adjusted z-scores spanning memory, language, executive function, and attention/processing speed were submitted to Ward's method, and the resulting four-cluster solution was cross-validated using an independent k-means analysis. The identified subgroups included an average balanced profile cluster (ABP), an average with relative non-memory weakness cluster (A-nonMEM↓), an average with memory-specific weakness cluster (A-MEM↓), and a global multidomain weakness cluster (G-MD↓). All four subgroup patterns were reproduced in the k-means solution, and the dissociation between the A-nonMEM↓ and A-MEM↓ paralleled the non-amnestic versus amnestic distinction reported in prior MCI and cluster-analytic studies. Cluster membership explained substantially more variance in domain-level cognitive performance than the Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA), indicating that the identified subgroup structure captured multidomain cognitive heterogeneity beyond global screening alone. These findings demonstrate that unsupervised, data-driven clustering can identify reproducible multidomain cognitive phenotypes within a community-recruited aging sample without reliance on predefined diagnostic categories. Hierarchical clustering may therefore provide a complementary framework for characterizing subtle patterns of cognitive heterogeneity across the broader spectrum of cognitive aging.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42449041What 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.