Dorota Chapko1, Roisin McCormack1, Corri Black2, Roger Staff3, Alison Murray1. 1. a Aberdeen Biomedical Imaging Centre , University of Aberdeen , Aberdeen , UK. 2. b Farr Institute @ Scotland, Institute of Applied Health Sciences , University of Aberdeen , Aberdeen , UK. 3. c Aberdeen Royal Infirmary , NHS Grampian , Aberdeen , UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The concept of cognitive reserve (CR) is defined as a moderator, which allows an individual to preserve cognition despite underlying brain pathology. There is no consensus of what potentially modifiable CR determinants are of greatest importance. The aim of this review was to identify life-course factors which protect older individuals from expressing cognitive decline despite the presence of brain pathology. METHOD: A systematic review search was performed in MEDLINE (1946-06/09/13), EMBASE (1947-06/09/13), and PsycheInfo (1967-06/09/13). We included studies examining CR in the context of the four commonest subtypes of dementia, mild cognitive impairment or healthy aging. Studies which combined measurement of underlying dementia-related neuropathology, cognitive function, and factors providing CR in a single model were accepted. We performed a qualitative synthesis of the results. RESULTS: Thirty-four studies out of 9229 screened records met our inclusion criteria and were therefore quality assessed and data extracted. Variation in CR definition made comparison across studies difficult. One hundred and forty-four out of 156 models examined education and occupation: overall, 58% of eligible models classified education and 60% occupation as a CR determinant, with 12% and 44% of those, respectively, being of high quality. Within healthy population suitable to inform preventative interventions, there was consistent evidence for education having a protective effect on general cognition in the face of multiple brain burden measures, while occupation presented inconclusive results within cognitive groups. CONCLUSIONS: Further research on modifiable determinants of CR beyond education/occupation including early-life factors and consensus on CR definition are warranted.
OBJECTIVES: The concept of cognitive reserve (CR) is defined as a moderator, which allows an individual to preserve cognition despite underlying brain pathology. There is no consensus of what potentially modifiable CR determinants are of greatest importance. The aim of this review was to identify life-course factors which protect older individuals from expressing cognitive decline despite the presence of brain pathology. METHOD: A systematic review search was performed in MEDLINE (1946-06/09/13), EMBASE (1947-06/09/13), and PsycheInfo (1967-06/09/13). We included studies examining CR in the context of the four commonest subtypes of dementia, mild cognitive impairment or healthy aging. Studies which combined measurement of underlying dementia-related neuropathology, cognitive function, and factors providing CR in a single model were accepted. We performed a qualitative synthesis of the results. RESULTS: Thirty-four studies out of 9229 screened records met our inclusion criteria and were therefore quality assessed and data extracted. Variation in CR definition made comparison across studies difficult. One hundred and forty-four out of 156 models examined education and occupation: overall, 58% of eligible models classified education and 60% occupation as a CR determinant, with 12% and 44% of those, respectively, being of high quality. Within healthy population suitable to inform preventative interventions, there was consistent evidence for education having a protective effect on general cognition in the face of multiple brain burden measures, while occupation presented inconclusive results within cognitive groups. CONCLUSIONS: Further research on modifiable determinants of CR beyond education/occupation including early-life factors and consensus on CR definition are warranted.
Entities:
Keywords:
Dementia and cognitive disorders; biological markers; neuroimaging; psychosocial and cultural aspects; quantitative methods and statistics
Authors: Meredith A Shafto; Richard N Henson; Fiona E Matthews; Jason R Taylor; Tina Emery; Sharon Erzinclioglu; Claire Hanley; James B Rowe; Rhodri Cusack; Andrew J Calder; William D Marslen-Wilson; John Duncan; Tim Dalgleish; Carol Brayne; Lorraine K Tyler Journal: J Aging Health Date: 2019-10-08
Authors: Jinshil Hyun; Charles B Hall; Mindy J Katz; Carol A Derby; Darren M Lipnicki; John D Crawford; Antonio Guaita; Roberta Vaccaro; Annalisa Davin; Ki Woong Kim; Ji Won Han; Jong Bin Bae; Susanne Röhr; Steffi Riedel-Heller; Mary Ganguli; Erin Jacobsen; Tiffany F Hughes; Henry Brodaty; Nicole A Kochan; Julian Trollor; Antonio Lobo; Javier Santabarbara; Raul Lopez-Anton; Perminder S Sachdev; Richard B Lipton Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2022 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Jeff Schaffert; Christian LoBue; Charles L White; Kristin Wilmoth; Nyaz Didehbani; Laura Lacritz; Trung Nguyen; Matthew E Peters; Lindy Fields; Chengxi Li; C Munro Cullum Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2020-02-11 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Benjamin L Brett; Samuel R Walton; Timothy B Meier; Andrew S Nencka; Jacob R Powell; Kelly S Giovanello; Kevin M Guskiewicz; Michael A McCrea Journal: J Neurotrauma Date: 2022-02-09 Impact factor: 5.269
Authors: R Boyle; S P Knight; C De Looze; D Carey; S Scarlett; Y Stern; I H Robertson; R A Kenny; R Whelan Journal: Alzheimers Res Ther Date: 2021-07-12 Impact factor: 6.982