Premium
Using the Framingham Cardiovascular Disease Risk Score to predict cognitive performance in cognitively normal non‐hispanic whites and Mexican American elders
Author(s) -
Vintimilla Raul,
Balasubramanian Kishore,
Hall James R.,
Johnson Leigh Ann,
O'Bryant Sid
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
alzheimer's and dementia
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 6.713
H-Index - 118
eISSN - 1552-5279
pISSN - 1552-5260
DOI - 10.1002/alz.045136
Subject(s) - medicine , framingham risk score , population , linear regression , cognition , analysis of variance , blood pressure , demography , framingham heart study , cognitive decline , epidemiology , diabetes mellitus , gerontology , disease , dementia , psychiatry , endocrinology , statistics , mathematics , environmental health , sociology
Abstract Background Prevalence of cardiovascular disease risk factors (CVRFs) is higher among Mexican Americans (MAs) that non‐Hispanic Whites (NHWs), placing this population at a higher risk of cognitive decline. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between the Framingham Cardiovascular Disease 10‐years risk score (FCVDRS) and cognitive performance among MAs and NHWs. This study extends the limited literature about FCVDRS and cognition among MAs. Method We studied 518 cognitively normal participants (92 NHWs and 426 MAs) from an epidemiological study of aging. Gender, age, hypertension treatment status, systolic blood pressure (SBP) level, smoking status, diabetes mellitus diagnosis (DM), HDL, and total cholesterol levels were used to calculate the FCVDRS for each individual. A linear regression was conducted to examine the association of FCVDRS with MMSE, logical memory I and II, Trails B, FAS, and digit span scores. A one‐way ANOVA was used to analyze the relationship of FCVDRS categories (low < 10, moderate 10 – 20, high > 20), and test scores, along with Tukey post hoc tests to elucidate the magnitude of differences between the groups. Education was entered as a covariate in the model. Result MAs had a higher prevalence of DM, higher SBP, and lower HDL values. Linear regression model was significant only for executive function in MAs , F(1,352) = 7.86, p = 0.005. One ‐way ANOVA showed a significant difference for Trails B, F(2,351) = 5.21, p = 0.006, and MMSE, F(2,414) = 3.00, p = 0.005 among MAs. In both cases, post hoc test indicated that MMSE and Trails B mean scores were lower in the high risk group when compared to the low risk group. No significant trends were seen in the Non‐Hispanic White subset. Conclusion Our data has shown that FCVDRS can be used to predict performance on measures of global cognition and executive function in MAs. Although more work has to be done to further understand the predictive power of FCVDRS, there is promise in using this model to develop early intervention programs targeted to MAs.