Bente Johnsen1, Bjørn Heine Strand1, Ieva Martinaityte1, Ellisiv B Mathiesen1, Henrik Schirmer1. 1. Department of Clinical Medicine (BJ, IM, EBM, HS), UiT The Arctic University of Norway; Department of Medicine (BJ, IM), University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø; Norwegian Institute of Public Health (BHS), Oslo; Department of Neurology (EBM), University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø; Department of Cardiology (HS), Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog; and Institute of Clinical Medicine (HS), University of Oslo, Norway.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Physical capacity and cardiovascular risk profiles seem to be improving in the population. Cognition has been improving due to a birth cohort effect, but evidence is conflicting on whether this improvement remains in the latest decades and what is causing the changes in our population older than 60 years. We aimed to investigate birth cohort differences in cognition. METHODS: The study comprised 9,514 participants from the Tromsø Study, an ongoing longitudinal cohort study. Participants were aged 60-87 years, born between 1914 and 1956. They did 4 cognitive tests in 3 waves during 2001-2016. Linear regression was applied and adjusted for age, education, blood pressure, smoking, hypercholesterolemia, stroke, heart attack, depression, diabetes, physical activity, alcohol use, BMI, and height. RESULTS: Cognitive test scores were better in later-born birth cohorts for all age groups, and in both sexes, compared with earlier-born cohorts. Increased education, physical activity, alcohol intake, decreasing smoking prevalence, and increasing height were associated with one-third of this improvement across birth cohorts in women and one-half of the improvement in men. DISCUSSION: Cognitive results were better in more recent-born birth cohorts compared with earlier born, assessed at the same age. The improvement was present in all cognitive domains, suggesting an overall improvement in cognitive performance. The 80-year-olds assessed in 2015-2016 performed like 60-year-olds assessed in 2001. The improved scores were associated with increased education level, increase in modest drinking frequency, increased physical activity, and, for men, smoking cessation and increased height.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Physical capacity and cardiovascular risk profiles seem to be improving in the population. Cognition has been improving due to a birth cohort effect, but evidence is conflicting on whether this improvement remains in the latest decades and what is causing the changes in our population older than 60 years. We aimed to investigate birth cohort differences in cognition. METHODS: The study comprised 9,514 participants from the Tromsø Study, an ongoing longitudinal cohort study. Participants were aged 60-87 years, born between 1914 and 1956. They did 4 cognitive tests in 3 waves during 2001-2016. Linear regression was applied and adjusted for age, education, blood pressure, smoking, hypercholesterolemia, stroke, heart attack, depression, diabetes, physical activity, alcohol use, BMI, and height. RESULTS: Cognitive test scores were better in later-born birth cohorts for all age groups, and in both sexes, compared with earlier-born cohorts. Increased education, physical activity, alcohol intake, decreasing smoking prevalence, and increasing height were associated with one-third of this improvement across birth cohorts in women and one-half of the improvement in men. DISCUSSION: Cognitive results were better in more recent-born birth cohorts compared with earlier born, assessed at the same age. The improvement was present in all cognitive domains, suggesting an overall improvement in cognitive performance. The 80-year-olds assessed in 2015-2016 performed like 60-year-olds assessed in 2001. The improved scores were associated with increased education level, increase in modest drinking frequency, increased physical activity, and, for men, smoking cessation and increased height.
Authors: Amy Berrington de Gonzalez; Patricia Hartge; James R Cerhan; Alan J Flint; Lindsay Hannan; Robert J MacInnis; Steven C Moore; Geoffrey S Tobias; Hoda Anton-Culver; Laura Beane Freeman; W Lawrence Beeson; Sandra L Clipp; Dallas R English; Aaron R Folsom; D Michal Freedman; Graham Giles; Niclas Hakansson; Katherine D Henderson; Judith Hoffman-Bolton; Jane A Hoppin; Karen L Koenig; I-Min Lee; Martha S Linet; Yikyung Park; Gaia Pocobelli; Arthur Schatzkin; Howard D Sesso; Elisabete Weiderpass; Bradley J Willcox; Alicja Wolk; Anne Zeleniuch-Jacquotte; Walter C Willett; Michael J Thun Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-12-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Heidi Ormstad; Tor A Rosness; Astrid Liv Mina Bergem; Espen Bjertness; Bjørn Heine Strand Journal: Int J Neurosci Date: 2015-05-22 Impact factor: 2.292
Authors: Anne Elise Eggen; Ellisiv B Mathiesen; Tom Wilsgaard; Bjarne K Jacobsen; Inger Njølstad Journal: Scand J Public Health Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 3.021
Authors: Jan Mannsverk; Tom Wilsgaard; Ellisiv B Mathiesen; Maja-Lisa Løchen; Knut Rasmussen; Dag S Thelle; Inger Njølstad; Laila Arnesdatter Hopstock; Kaare Harald Bønaa Journal: Circulation Date: 2015-11-18 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Kirsty Lu; Jennifer M Nicholas; Jessica D Collins; Sarah-Naomi James; Thomas D Parker; Christopher A Lane; Ashvini Keshavan; Sarah E Keuss; Sarah M Buchanan; Heidi Murray-Smith; David M Cash; Carole H Sudre; Ian B Malone; William Coath; Andrew Wong; Susie M D Henley; Sebastian J Crutch; Nick C Fox; Marcus Richards; Jonathan M Schott Journal: Neurology Date: 2019-10-30 Impact factor: 9.910