4.5 Article

Olfactory identification deficits and MCI in a multi-ethnic elderly community sample

期刊

NEUROBIOLOGY OF AGING
卷 31, 期 9, 页码 1593-1600

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2008.09.008

关键词

Olfaction; Mild cognitive impairment; Hippocampal volume; Entorhinal cortex volume; Verbal recall; Ethnicity; Epidemiology

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [AG007232, AG029949, AG17761]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Odor identification deficits occur in Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and predict clinical conversion from MCI to AD. In an epidemiologic study conducted in a multi-ethnic community elderly sample (average 80 years old), the University or Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT, range 0-40) was administered to 1092 non-demented subjects Women (mean 26 6, S D 6 6) scored higher than men (mean 24 4, S D 7.4, p < 02), and ethnic differences were not significant after controlling forage and education. UPSIT scores correlated inversely with age (r = -0 24.p < 0001) and positively with Selective Reminding Test immediate recall (r=0 33), delayed recall (r=0 28), category fluency (r=0 28) and the 15-item Boston Naming Test (r=0.23), all ps < 0001 In a sub-sample in which MRI was done. UPSIT scores showed a significant correlation with hippocampal volume (n=571, r=0 16, p < 001) but not entorhinal cortex volume nor total number of white matter hyperintensities In ANOVA, UPSIT scores differed (p < 0001) as a function of MCI classification no MCI (mean 26 6. S D 6 8), non-amnestic MCI (mean 24 4, S D. 7 2). and amnestic MCI (mean 23 5, S D 6 7). The difference between amnestic MCI and no MCI remained significant after controlling for relevant covariates These findings indicate that the predictive utility of olfactory identification deficits for decline from no MCI to MCI and AD needs to be assessed in longitudinal studies of elderly community samples (C) 2008 Elsevier Inc All rights reserved

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据