OBJECTIVE: To determine whether incidence of impaired cognitive screening status is higher in the southern Stroke Belt region of the United States than in the remaining United States. METHODS: A national cohort of adults age ≥45 years was recruited by the Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) study from 2003 to 2007. Participants' global cognitive status was assessed annually by telephone with the Six-Item Screener (SIS) and every 2 years with fluency and recall tasks. Participants who reported no stroke history and who were cognitively intact at enrollment (SIS >4 of 6) were included (N = 23,913, including 56% women; 38% African Americans and 62% European Americans; 56% Stroke Belt residents and 44% from the remaining contiguous United States and the District of Columbia). Regional differences in incident cognitive impairment (SIS score ≤4) were adjusted for age, sex, race, education, and time between first and last assessments. RESULTS: A total of 1,937 participants (8.1%) declined to an SIS score ≤4 at their most recent assessment, over a mean of 4.1 (±1.6) years. Residents of the Stroke Belt had greater adjusted odds of incident cognitive impairment than non-Belt residents (odds ratio, 1.18; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-1.30). All demographic factors and time independently predicted impairment. INTERPRETATION: Regional disparities in cognitive decline mirror regional disparities in stroke mortality, suggesting shared risk factors for these adverse outcomes. Efforts to promote cerebrovascular and cognitive health should be directed to the Stroke Belt.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether incidence of impaired cognitive screening status is higher in the southern Stroke Belt region of the United States than in the remaining United States. METHODS: A national cohort of adults age ≥45 years was recruited by the Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) study from 2003 to 2007. Participants' global cognitive status was assessed annually by telephone with the Six-Item Screener (SIS) and every 2 years with fluency and recall tasks. Participants who reported no stroke history and who were cognitively intact at enrollment (SIS >4 of 6) were included (N = 23,913, including 56% women; 38% African Americans and 62% European Americans; 56% Stroke Belt residents and 44% from the remaining contiguous United States and the District of Columbia). Regional differences in incident cognitive impairment (SIS score ≤4) were adjusted for age, sex, race, education, and time between first and last assessments. RESULTS: A total of 1,937 participants (8.1%) declined to an SIS score ≤4 at their most recent assessment, over a mean of 4.1 (±1.6) years. Residents of the Stroke Belt had greater adjusted odds of incident cognitive impairment than non-Belt residents (odds ratio, 1.18; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-1.30). All demographic factors and time independently predicted impairment. INTERPRETATION: Regional disparities in cognitive decline mirror regional disparities in stroke mortality, suggesting shared risk factors for these adverse outcomes. Efforts to promote cerebrovascular and cognitive health should be directed to the Stroke Belt.
Authors: Sjoerd M Euser; Miranda T Schram; Albert Hofman; Rudi G J Westendorp; Monique M B Breteler Journal: Epidemiology Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 4.822
Authors: Virginia G Wadley; Leslie A McClure; Virginia J Howard; Frederick W Unverzagt; Rodney C Go; Claudia S Moy; Martha R Crowther; Camilo R Gomez; George Howard Journal: Stroke Date: 2007-02-22 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: H C Hendrie; A Ogunniyi; K S Hall; O Baiyewu; F W Unverzagt; O Gureje; S Gao; R M Evans; A O Ogunseyinde; A O Adeyinka; B Musick; S L Hui Journal: JAMA Date: 2001-02-14 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Patrick M Pullicino; Virginia G Wadley; Leslie A McClure; Monika M Safford; Ronald M Lazar; Marc Klapholz; Ali Ahmed; Virginia J Howard; George Howard Journal: J Card Fail Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 5.712
Authors: Wenfei Zhu; Virginia J Howard; Virginia G Wadley; Brent Hutto; Steven N Blair; John E Vena; Natalie Colabianchi; David Rhodes; Steven P Hooker Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2015-12 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: S R Gillett; L A McClure; P W Callas; E L Thacker; F W Unverzagt; V G Wadley; A J Letter; M Cushman Journal: J Thromb Haemost Date: 2018-06-06 Impact factor: 5.824
Authors: Virginia G Wadley; Leslie A McClure; David G Warnock; Caroline L Lassen-Greene; Robert J Hopkin; Dawn A Laney; Virginia M Clarke; Manjula Kurella Tamura; George Howard; Katherine Sims Journal: JIMD Rep Date: 2015-01-08
Authors: Sarah R Gillett; Evan L Thacker; Abraham J Letter; Leslie A McClure; Virginia G Wadley; Frederick W Unverzagt; Brett M Kissela; Richard E Kennedy; Stephen P Glasser; Deborah A Levine; Mary Cushman Journal: Clin Neuropsychol Date: 2015-05-15 Impact factor: 3.535
Authors: Jennifer Weuve; Daniel Z Press; Francine Grodstein; Robert O Wright; Howard Hu; Marc G Weisskopf Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2012-11-09 Impact factor: 10.338
Authors: Paola Gilsanz; Elizabeth Rose Mayeda; M Maria Glymour; Charles P Quesenberry; Rachel A Whitmer Journal: JAMA Neurol Date: 2017-09-01 Impact factor: 18.302
Authors: Wenfei Zhu; Virginia G Wadley; Virginia J Howard; Brent Hutto; Steven N Blair; Steven P Hooker Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2017-01 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Georgios Tsivgoulis; Theodora Psaltopoulou; Virginia G Wadley; Andrei V Alexandrov; George Howard; Frederick W Unverzagt; Claudia Moy; Virginia J Howard; Brett Kissela; Suzanne E Judd Journal: Stroke Date: 2015-01-27 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Nicholette D Palmer Allred; Laura M Raffield; Joycelyn C Hardy; Fang-Chi Hsu; Jasmin Divers; Jianzhao Xu; S Carrie Smith; Christina E Hugenschmidt; Benjamin C Wagner; Christopher T Whitlow; Kaycee M Sink; Joseph A Maldjian; Jeff D Williamson; Donald W Bowden; Barry I Freedman Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2016-10-04 Impact factor: 19.112