4.4 Review

Maintenance, reserve and compensation: the cognitive neuroscience of healthy ageing

期刊

NATURE REVIEWS NEUROSCIENCE
卷 19, 期 11, 页码 701-710

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41583-018-0068-2

关键词

-

资金

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Planning and Dissemination Grant [373172]
  2. Duke University (North Carolina, USA)
  3. Douglas Hospital Research Centre (Montreal, Canada)
  4. US National Institutes of Health (NIH) [RO1-AG19731]
  5. NIH National Institute on Aging (NIA) [P50-AG005146]
  6. National Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) [RGPIN-2016-06132]
  7. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) [A8261]
  8. NIH [R56-AG049793, R01-AG006265, R21-AG045460, RF1-AG039103]
  9. CIHR [MOP- 143311, MOP 126105]
  10. Max Planck Society
  11. Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation
  12. NSERC [RGPIN-2018-05761]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cognitive ageing research examines the cognitive abilities that are preserved and/or those that decline with advanced age. There is great individual variability in cognitive ageing trajectories. Some older adults show little decline in cognitive ability compared with young adults and are thus termed 'optimally ageing'. By contrast, others exhibit substantial cognitive decline and may develop dementia. Human neuroimaging research has led to a number of important advances in our understanding of the neural mechanisms underlying these two outcomes. However, interpreting the age-related changes and differences in brain structure, activation and functional connectivity that this research reveals is an ongoing challenge. Ambiguous terminology is a major source of difficulty in this venture. Three terms in particular - compensation, maintenance and reserve have been used in a number of different ways, and researchers continue to disagree about the kinds of evidence or patterns of results that are required to interpret findings related to these concepts. As such inconsistencies can impede progress in both theoretical and empirical research, here, we aim to clarify and propose consensual definitions of these terms.

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

4.4
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