Cited by 98Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchCancer-related cognitive impairment studiesAlzheimer's disease research and treatments

Progression from normal cognition to mild cognitive impairment in a diverse clinic-based and community-based elderly cohort

Open access
Chen, Yingjia, Denny, Katherine G., Harvey, Danielle, Farias, Sarah Tomaszewski, Mungas, Dan, DeCarli, Charles, Beckett, Laurel·2017·Alzheimer's & Dementia

Abstract

Introduction: Investigation of the conversion rates from normal cognition (NC) to mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is important, as effective early intervention could potentially prevent or substantially delay the onset of dementia. However, reported conversion rates differ across studies and recruitment source. Our study examined predictors of conversion from NC to MCI in a racially and ethnically diverse sample drawn both from community and clinic recruitment sources. Methods: Rates and predictors of conversion were assessed in an ongoing prospective longitudinal study at University of California, Davis, Alzheimer's Disease Center from 2000 to 2015. Participants (n = 254) were recruited through a clinic (5%) and community sample (95%). They were clinically confirmed as cognitively normal at baseline and followed up to seven years. Recruitment source, demographic factors (age, gender, race/ethnicity, year of education, APOE ε4 positive), cognitive measures (SENAS test scores), functional assessments (CDR sum of boxes), and neuroimaging measures (total brain volume, total hippocampal volume, white hyperintensity volume) were assessed as predictors of conversion from cognitively normal to mild cognitive impairment using proportional hazards models. Results: Of 254 participants, 62 (11 clinic, 51 community) progressed to MCI. The clinic‐based sample showed an annual conversion rate of 30% (95% CI 17%–54%) per person‐year, whereas the community‐based sample showed a conversion rate of 5% (95% CI 3%–6%) per person‐year. Risk factors for conversion include clinic‐based recruitment, being older, lower executive function and worse functional assessment at baseline, and smaller total brain volume. Discussion: Older adults who sought out a clinical evaluation, even when they are found to have normal cognition, have increased risk of subsequent development of MCI. Results are consistent with other studies showing subjective cognitive complaints are a risk for future cognitive impairment, but extend such findings to show that those who seek evaluation for their complaints are at particularly high risk. Moreover, these individuals have subtle, but significant differences in functional and cognitive abilities that, in the presence of concerns and evidence of atrophy on by brain imaging, warrant continued clinical follow‐up. These risk factors could also be used as stratification variables for dementia prevention clinical trial design.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jalz.2016.07.151

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [24]DeCarli C Maisog J Murphy DG Teichberg D Rapoport SI Horwitz B Method for quantification of brain, ventricular, and subarachnoid CSF volumes from MR images J Comput Assist Tomogr 1992 16 2 274 284 1545026

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chen, Y., Denny, K. G., Harvey, D., Farias, S. T., Mungas, D., DeCarli, C., & Beckett, L.
Affiliations
University of California, Davis (US)
Corresponding author
Beckett, Laurel
Venue
Alzheimer's & Dementia
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-08-30
Volume
13
Issue
4
Pages
399-405
ISSN
  • 1552-5260 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-5279
OpenAlex
W2512273414
Cited by
98
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 3
FWCI
7.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Alzheimer s & Dementia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Aging (P30AG010129, AG 021028)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Cancer-related cognitive impairment studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
Keywords
mild cognitive impairment
MeSH terms
Age Factors, Aged, Brain, Female, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Organ Size, Prospective Studies, Risk Factors, Disease Progression, Kaplan-Meier Estimate, Apolipoprotein E4, Cognitive Dysfunction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review