Cited by 31Posttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchTraumatic Brain Injury Research

The long-term consequences of trauma and posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms on later life cognitive function and dementia risk

Open access
Nilaweera, Dinuli, Freak-Poli, Rosanne, Ritchie, Karen, Chaudieu, Isabelle, Ancelin, Marie-Laure, Ryan, Joanne·2020·Psychiatry Research

Abstract

Stress may be a risk factor for dementia, however it is unknown whether post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms are associated with incident dementia in community-dwelling older individuals. The aim was to determine whether lifetime major trauma with and without re-experiencing of PTSD symptoms is associated with later-life cognition and dementia risk. Participants were 1,700 community-dwelling older adults (65+) in the longitudinal ESPRIT study followed over 14 years. Lifetime major traumatic exposure and PTSD were assessed using Watson's PTSD Inventory. Cognitive tests assessed global cognition, visual memory, verbal fluency, psychomotor speed and executive function. Incident dementia was diagnosed according to DSM-IV criteria. Lifetime major trauma (versus no trauma) was associated with significantly increased executive function and increased global function in men, however women with lifetime trauma and re-experiencing symptoms had a significantly increased risk of low global cognition. Over 14 years, lifetime trauma without re-experiencing symptoms was associated with a significantly decreased risk of incident dementia, particularly for women. Lifetime major trauma without re-experiencing symptoms (but not with) may be protective for later life cognitive function. However, the mechanisms and moderating factors underlying these association requires further investigation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113506

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nilaweera, D., Freak-Poli, R., Ritchie, K., Chaudieu, I., Ancelin, M.-L., & Ryan, J.
Affiliations
  • Monash University (AU)
  • Inserm (FR)
Corresponding author
Ryan, Joanne
Venue
Psychiatry Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-12
Volume
294
Pages
113506
ISSN
0165-1781 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3092359311
Cited by
31
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3
FWCI
1.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychiatry Research (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Cross Connect (Southern Cross University) (submittedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Health and Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
Keywords
post-traumatic stress disorder, lifetime trauma, re-experiencing symptoms, dementia risk, cognitive function, older adults, executive function, sex differences, posttraumatic growth, social support
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cognition, Cognition Disorders, Dementia, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Life Change Events, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Retrospective Studies, Risk Factors, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Time Factors

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