Cited by 266Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsAging and Gerontology Research

Chronic Psychological Distress and Risk of Alzheimer’s Disease in Old Age

Wilson, Robert S., Arnold, Steven E., Schneider, Julie A., Kelly, Jeremiah F., Tang, Yuxiao, Bennett, David A.·2006·Neuroepidemiology

Abstract

Clinical and pathological data from the Rush Memory and Aging Project were used to test the hypothesis that distress proneness is associated with increased risk of Alzheimer's disease (AD). More than 600 older persons without dementia completed a 6-item measure of neuroticism, a stable indicator of proneness to psychological distress. At annual intervals thereafter, they underwent uniform evaluations that included clinical classification of AD and administration of 18 cognitive tests. Those who died underwent brain autopsy from which composite measures of AD pathology were derived. During a mean of about 3 years of follow-up, 55 people were clinically diagnosed with AD. In analyses that controlled for age, sex, and education, persons with a high level of distress proneness (score = 24, 90th percentile) were 2.7 times more likely to develop AD than those not prone to distress (score = 6, 10th percentile). Adjustment for depressive symptomatology or frequency of cognitive, social, and physical activity did not substantially change this effect. Distress proneness was also associated with more rapid cognitive decline. Among 45 participants who died and underwent brain autopsy, distress proneness was unrelated to diverse measures of AD pathology and was inversely related to cognition after controlling for AD pathology. The results support the hypothesis that distress proneness is associated with increased risk of dementia and suggest that neurobiologic mechanisms other than AD pat…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1159/000095761

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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
Wilson, R. S., Arnold, S. E., Schneider, J. A., Kelly, J. F., Tang, Y., & Bennett, D. A.
Affiliations
  • Rush University Medical Center (US)
  • Rush University (US)
Venue
Neuroepidemiology
Publisher
S. Karger AG
Published
2006
Volume
27
Issue
3
Pages
143-153
ISSN
  • 0251-5350 (ISSN-L)
  • 1423-0208
OpenAlex
W2033220940
Cited by
266
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 17
FWCI
7.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neuroepidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Aging (R01AG017917, R01‐AG17917, R01AG024480)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Aging and Gerontology Research
Keywords
Alzheimer's disease, psychological distress, neuroticism, dementia risk, cognitive decline, brain autopsy, Alzheimer's disease pathology, older adults, depressive symptoms, Rush Memory and Aging Project
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Alzheimer Disease, Chronic Disease, Disease Susceptibility, Female, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Risk Factors, Stress, Psychological, Linear Models

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