4.7 Article

Diabetes and function in different cognitive systems in older individuals without dementia

Journal

DIABETES CARE
Volume 29, Issue 3, Pages 560-565

Publisher

AMER DIABETES ASSOC
DOI: 10.2337/diacare.29.03.06.dc05-1901

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NIA NIH HHS [R01 AG 17917, R01 AG 022018, P30 AG 10161, K23 AG 23675] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE - To examine the relation of type 2 diabetes to the level of function in five different cognitive systems in older individuals without dementia. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS - Participants were 882 older men and women without dementia participating in the Rush Memory and Aging Project, a longitudinal clinical-pathological study of aging and dementia. They underwent uniform evaluations, which included clinical classification of dementia, and detailed cognitive function testing from which previously established summary measures of episodic memory, semantic memory, working memory perceptual speed, visuospatial ability, and global cognition were derived. Diabetes was identified by history and direct medication inspection. RESULTS - Diabetes was present in 116 (13%) participants. In separate linear regression models controlling for age, sex, and education, diabetes was associated with lower levels of semantic memory (P < 0.001) and perceptual speed (P = 0.005), but not with episodic memory, working memory, or visuospatial ability or with a measure of global cognition. The associations of diabetes with cognition were reduced when controlling for several vascular variables, and the associations were substantially stronger in current smokers than in individuals who never smoked or formerly smoked. CONCLUSIONS - These results suggest that type 2 diabetes is associated with cognitive impairment, especially in semantic memory and perceptual speed and that these effects may be modified by smoking status.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available