HwaJung Choi1, Robert F Schoeni2, Linda G Martin3, Kenneth M Langa4. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Michigan. 2. Department of Economics, Institute for Social Research, Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy, University of Michigan. 3. RAND Corporation. 4. Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, Institute of Gerontology, Department of Health Management and Policy, School of Public Health, University of Michigan.
Abstract
Objectives: To determine whether the prevalence of cognitive limitation (CL) among Americans ages 55 to 69 years changed between 1998 and 2014, and to assess the trends in socioeconomic disparities in CL among groups defined by race/ethnicity, education, income, and wealth. Method: Logistic regression using 1998-2014 data from the biennial Health and Retirement Study, a nationally representative data set. CL is defined as a score of 0-11 on a 27-point cognitive battery of items focused on memory. Socioeconomic status (SES) measures are classified as quartiles. Results: In models controlling for age, gender, and previous cognitive testing, we find no significant change over time in the overall prevalence of CL, widening disparities in limitation by income and, in some cases, wealth, and improvements among non-Hispanic whites but not other racial/ethnic groups. Discussion: Among people 55-69, rates of CL are many times higher for groups with lower SES than those with higher SES, and recent trends show little indication that the gaps are narrowing.
Objectives: To determine whether the prevalence of cognitive limitation (CL) among Americans ages 55 to 69 years changed between 1998 and 2014, and to assess the trends in socioeconomic disparities in CL among groups defined by race/ethnicity, education, income, and wealth. Method: Logistic regression using 1998-2014 data from the biennial Health and Retirement Study, a nationally representative data set. CL is defined as a score of 0-11 on a 27-point cognitive battery of items focused on memory. Socioeconomic status (SES) measures are classified as quartiles. Results: In models controlling for age, gender, and previous cognitive testing, we find no significant change over time in the overall prevalence of CL, widening disparities in limitation by income and, in some cases, wealth, and improvements among non-Hispanic whites but not other racial/ethnic groups. Discussion: Among people 55-69, rates of CL are many times higher for groups with lower SES than those with higher SES, and recent trends show little indication that the gaps are narrowing.
Authors: Annette L Fitzpatrick; Lewis H Kuller; Diane G Ives; Oscar L Lopez; William Jagust; John C S Breitner; Beverly Jones; Constantine Lyketsos; Corinne Dulberg Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: May A Beydoun; Hind A Beydoun; Alyssa A Gamaldo; Alison Teel; Alan B Zonderman; Youfa Wang Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2014-06-24 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Jennifer Weuve; Kumar B Rajan; Lisa L Barnes; Robert S Wilson; Denis A Evans Journal: J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci Date: 2018-04-16 Impact factor: 4.077
Authors: Jet M J Vonk; Miguel Arce Rentería; Justina F Avila; Nicole Schupf; James M Noble; Richard Mayeux; Adam M Brickman; Jennifer J Manly Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2019-10-28 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Melinda C Power; Erin E Bennett; Robert W Turner; N Maritza Dowling; Adam Ciarleglio; M Maria Glymour; Kan Z Gianattasio Journal: JAMA Neurol Date: 2021-03-01 Impact factor: 18.302