4.7 Article

Stroke risk factors and loss of high cognitive function

期刊

NEUROLOGY
卷 63, 期 5, 页码 793-799

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1212/01.WNL.0000137014.36689.7F

关键词

-

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [N01-HC-85085, N01 HC-15103, N01-HC-35129, N01-HC-85079, N01-HC-85080, N01-HC-85081, N01-HC-85082, N01-HC-85083, N01-HC-85084, N01-HC-85086] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Modifiable stroke risk factors may contribute to age-associated declines in cognitive function. Individuals with high levels of cognitive function after midlife may have less exposure to these stroke risk factors or may be less susceptible to their effects on cognition. Methods: The Cardiovascular Health Study (CHS)* is a population-based, longitudinal cohort study of 5,888 people age 65 years and older. Participants ( n = 4,129) who were free of dementia, stroke, or TIA at the time of baseline cranial MRI were selected for analysis. High cognitive function at baseline was defined by performance at or above midlife norms on the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination (3MS). Results: The odds of having high cognitive function at baseline decreased by quartile of stroke risk ( highest vs lowest risk quartile, adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.68; 95% CI 0.52 to 0.88; p for trend = 0.005). Stroke risk was a predictor of decline on the 3MS in those with typical levels of cognitive function at baseline, even in the absence of incident stroke or TIA ( highest vs lowest risk quartile for 3MS decline, adjusted OR 2.11; 95% CI 1.42 to 3.13; p for trend < 0.001). In contrast, stroke risk was not associated with decline on the 3MS in those with high cognitive function at baseline ( p = 0.03 for interaction). Conclusions: In a cohort of older adults without stroke, TIA, or dementia, cognitive function and incident cognitive decline were associated with risk for stroke. Additional studies are needed to determine whether modification of stroke risk factors can reduce the cognitive decline that is often attributed to normal aging.

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

4.7
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