Cited by 323Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAging and Gerontology ResearchCognitive Abilities and Testing

Cognitive leisure activities and future risk of cognitive impairment and dementia: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Open access
Yates, Lauren A, Ziser, Shier, Spector, Aimee, Orrell, Martin·2016·International Psychogeriatrics

Abstract

BACKGROUND: As life expectancies continue to rise, modifiable lifestyle factors that may prevent cognitive decline and dementia in later life become increasingly important in order to maintain quality of life in old age. METHODS: Five meta-analyses were conducted on data from papers identified in a systematic review. Studies were grouped according to outcomes (dementia, cognitive impairment including amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment (aMCI), Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI), and cognitive decline) and output (risk (RR), odds (OR), or hazard ratios (HR)). RESULTS: Nineteen studies met our inclusion criteria and quality assessments. Four of five meta-analyses showed significant associations between participation in cognitive leisure activities and reduced risk of cognitive impairment (OR = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.56-0.85) and dementia (HR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.46-0.74; RR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.42-0.90; OR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.67-0.90). However, one pooled analysis of cognitive impairment studies did not reach significance (HR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.71-1.02). Mentally stimulating leisure activities were significantly associated with later life cognition (β = 0.11, p = 0.05), better memory (β = 0.20, 95% CI: 0.11-0.29), speed of processing (β = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.29-0.45), and executive functioning (β = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.15-0.29), and less decline in overall cognition (β = -0.23, p < 0.01), language (β = -0.11, p < 0.05), and executive functioning (β = -0.13, p < 0.05). Activities were also shown to reduce rate of cognitive decline (estimate = 0.03, SE = 0.01, p = 0.00). CONCLUSIONS: There is increasing evidence that participation in cognitively stimulating leisure activities may contribute to a reduction of risk of dementia and cognitive impairment in later life. Promoting involvement in such activities across lifespan could be an important focus for primary prevention strategies for governments and health services.

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 · 10.1017/s1041610216001137

Cites

53 of 53 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?

  • Previous literature highlights the negative effects of age on spatial abilities, memory, attention, and perceptual speed.

    “Previous literature highlights the negative effects of age on spatial abilities, memory, attention, and perceptual speed [19,27,75].”

    From Designing ICTs for Users with Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Usability Study (2020) · cites this paper as [19]

    The Interpretation of findings section says cognitive mechanics generally decline in later life, supporting the broad point about age-related cognitive losses. It does not say that ageing negatively affects each of the four named abilities; the table in References lists memory, perceptual speed, and visuo-spatial ability as measures, not as findings about ageing, and does not establish the claim about attention. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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. Higgins, J. P. and Green, S. (Eds.)., (2008). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Vol. 5. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Yates, L. A., Ziser, S., Spector, A., & Orrell, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Nottingham (GB)
  • University College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Yates, Lauren A
Venue
International Psychogeriatrics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-08-09
Volume
28
Issue
11
Pages
1791-1806
ISSN
  • 1041-6102 (ISSN-L)
  • 1741-203X
OpenAlex
W2510019780
Cited by
323
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 28 · 2025: 35 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 46 · 2022: 39 · 2021: 43 · 2020: 50 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 6
FWCI
2.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Psychogeriatrics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute for Health and Care Research (08/116/06)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Aging and Gerontology Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
Keywords
dementia risk, cognitive impairment, mild cognitive impairment, cognitive decline, cognitive stimulation, leisure, memory, executive function, processing speed, later-life cognition, dementia prevention, lifestyle intervention, older adults, cognitive reserve, brain reserve, neurodegeneration, neuroinflammation, neuroprotection, neuroplasticity, neurogenesis, neurotrophins, neurotensin
MeSH terms
Cognition, Dementia, Humans, Leisure Activities, Life Style, Quality of Life, Risk Factors, Risk Reduction Behavior

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