Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 306

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Cerebral white matter lesions and subjective cognitive dysfunction: The Rotterdam Scan Study

Open access
de Groot, J.C., de Leeuw, F.-E., Oudkerk, M., Hofman, A., Jolles, J., Breteler, M.M.B.·2001·Neurology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the relationship between cerebral white matter lesions (WML) and subjective cognitive dysfunction. BACKGROUND: Subjective cognitive dysfunction is present when a person perceives failures of cognitive function. When annoying enough, these failures will be expressed as complaints. Subjective cognitive dysfunction may be a prelude to or coincide with objective cognitive impairment. WML have been related to objective cognitive impairment and dementia, but their relationship with subjective cognitive dysfunction is not clear. Previous population-based studies on the latter relationship have been limited in sample size, recording of subjective cognitive function, and assessment of WML severity. METHODS: We randomly sampled 1,049 elderly nondemented participants from the general population. Data on subjective cognitive dysfunction and its progression were derived from a 15-item questionnaire. Objective cognitive performance was assessed using a series of neuropsychological tests. WML were scored on MRI for periventricular and subcortical regions separately. RESULTS: WML were associated with more subjective cognitive failures. WML were more severe for participants reporting progression of these failures compared with participants without these failures, especially within participants with better than average cognitive performance (p = 0.008, for periventricular WML). Participants with severe WML reported progression of cognitive failures more than twice as often than did those with little or no WML. The relationship between the severity of WML and subjective cognitive failures was present for periventricular and subcortical WML. CONCLUSIONS: WML are associated with subjective cognitive failures and in particular with reporting progression of these failures, even in the absence of objective cognitive impairment.

Overview

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 · 10.1212/wnl.56.11.1539

Cites

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
de Groot, J. C., de Leeuw, F.-E., Oudkerk, M., Hofman, A., Jolles, J., & Breteler, M. M. B.
Venue
Neurology
Published
2001-06-12
Volume
56
Issue
11
Pages
1539-1545
ISSN
  • 0028-3878 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-632X
OpenAlex
W2029324012
Cited by
306
References
0
FWCI
7.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.