Impact of stroke on cognition in old age: Comparison of two population-based cohorts, born up to 30 years apart and followed from age 70 to 85.

IF 3.7 1区 心理学 Q1 GERONTOLOGY
Psychology and Aging Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-23 DOI:10.1037/pag0000824
Valgeir Thorvaldsson, Johan Skoog, Ingmar Skoog, Boo Johansson
{"title":"Impact of stroke on cognition in old age: Comparison of two population-based cohorts, born up to 30 years apart and followed from age 70 to 85.","authors":"Valgeir Thorvaldsson, Johan Skoog, Ingmar Skoog, Boo Johansson","doi":"10.1037/pag0000824","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Little is known about birth cohort differences in the impact of stroke on cognitive aging. Given improved poststroke rehabilitation and better treatments for vascular health risk, we may expect a reduction in the stroke impact in later-born cohorts. We tested this prediction using data from two cohorts, born in 1901-1907 (<i>n</i> = 1,155) and 1930 (<i>n</i> = 919), identified from the same city population at the same age of 70 and subsequently measured on the same cognitive outcomes (i.e., spatial ability, perceptual-motor speed, and reasoning) at ages 70, 75, 79, and 85. We fitted multiple-group second-order latent growth curve models to the data, regressing the first-order cognitive factor on the time-varying stroke variable and controlling for relevant covariates. Findings revealed moderate to large average cognitive decline (<i>d</i> = -.45) following stroke, and the impact was relatively similar across cohorts (1901-1907: <i>d</i> = -.52; 1930: <i>d</i> = -.39). However, there was a stroke by age by cohort interaction, implying that the stroke impact increased with age in the 1901-1907 cohort (<i>d</i><sub>age</sub> ≤ 75 = -.42; <i>d</i><sub>age</sub> ≥ 79 = -.70) but decreased in the 1930 cohort (dage ≤ 75 = -.53; <i>d</i><sub>age</sub> ≥ 79 = -.17). We found no evidence for lagged effect of stroke beyond the impact on measures following the incidence. Our hypothesis was only partially supported, as the impact of stroke was reduced in the later-born cohort but solely at higher ages. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48426,"journal":{"name":"Psychology and Aging","volume":" ","pages":"484-494"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology and Aging","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000824","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Little is known about birth cohort differences in the impact of stroke on cognitive aging. Given improved poststroke rehabilitation and better treatments for vascular health risk, we may expect a reduction in the stroke impact in later-born cohorts. We tested this prediction using data from two cohorts, born in 1901-1907 (n = 1,155) and 1930 (n = 919), identified from the same city population at the same age of 70 and subsequently measured on the same cognitive outcomes (i.e., spatial ability, perceptual-motor speed, and reasoning) at ages 70, 75, 79, and 85. We fitted multiple-group second-order latent growth curve models to the data, regressing the first-order cognitive factor on the time-varying stroke variable and controlling for relevant covariates. Findings revealed moderate to large average cognitive decline (d = -.45) following stroke, and the impact was relatively similar across cohorts (1901-1907: d = -.52; 1930: d = -.39). However, there was a stroke by age by cohort interaction, implying that the stroke impact increased with age in the 1901-1907 cohort (dage ≤ 75 = -.42; dage ≥ 79 = -.70) but decreased in the 1930 cohort (dage ≤ 75 = -.53; dage ≥ 79 = -.17). We found no evidence for lagged effect of stroke beyond the impact on measures following the incidence. Our hypothesis was only partially supported, as the impact of stroke was reduced in the later-born cohort but solely at higher ages. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

中风对老年认知能力的影响:比较两组相差 30 年出生、70 至 85 岁随访的人群。
人们对中风对认知老化影响的出生队列差异知之甚少。鉴于脑卒中后康复治疗的改善和血管健康风险治疗的改进,我们可以预期脑卒中对较晚出生队列的影响会减小。我们使用 1901-1907 年出生(n = 1,155 人)和 1930 年出生(n = 919 人)的两个队列的数据对这一预测进行了检验,这两个队列在 70 岁时从同一城市人口中识别出来,随后在 70、75、79 和 85 岁时进行了相同认知结果(即空间能力、感知运动速度和推理能力)的测量。我们对数据拟合了多组二阶潜增长曲线模型,将一阶认知因子与随时间变化的中风变量进行回归,并控制相关协变量。研究结果显示,中风后的平均认知能力下降幅度为中等至较大(d = -.45),不同组群之间的影响相对相似(1901-1907:d = -.52;1930:d = -.39)。然而,中风与年龄、队列之间存在交互作用,这意味着在 1901-1907 年队列中,中风的影响随着年龄的增长而增大(dage ≤ 75 = -.42; dage ≥ 79 = -.70),但在 1930 年队列中则减小(dage ≤ 75 = -.53; dage ≥ 79 = -.17)。除了对发病后各项指标的影响外,我们没有发现中风滞后效应的证据。我们的假设只得到了部分支持,因为中风对较晚出生组群的影响有所减弱,但仅对较高年龄组群有影响。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
10.80%
发文量
97
期刊介绍: Psychology and Aging publishes original articles on adult development and aging. Such original articles include reports of research that may be applied, biobehavioral, clinical, educational, experimental (laboratory, field, or naturalistic studies), methodological, or psychosocial. Although the emphasis is on original research investigations, occasional theoretical analyses of research issues, practical clinical problems, or policy may appear, as well as critical reviews of a content area in adult development and aging. Clinical case studies that have theoretical significance are also appropriate. Brief reports are acceptable with the author"s agreement not to submit a full report to another journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信