Premium
The association between different cognitive domains and age in a multi‐centre study of middle‐aged and older European men
Author(s) -
Lee David M.,
Tajar Abdelouahid,
Ulubaev Aslan,
Pendleton Neil,
O'Neill Terence W.,
O'Connor Daryl B.,
Bartfai Gyorgy,
Boonen Steven,
Casanueva Felipe F.,
Finn Joseph D.,
Forti Gianni,
Giwercman Aleksander,
Han Thang S.,
Huhtaniemi Ilpo T.,
Kula Krzysztof,
Lean Michael E. J.,
Punab Margus,
Silman Alan J.,
Vanderschueren Dirk,
Wu Frederick C. W.
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
international journal of geriatric psychiatry
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.28
H-Index - 129
eISSN - 1099-1166
pISSN - 0885-6230
DOI - 10.1002/gps.2255
Subject(s) - cognition , digit symbol substitution test , multilevel model , psychology , effects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performance , cognitive test , logical address , association (psychology) , visual memory , neuropsychological test , test (biology) , cognitive decline , neuropsychology , regression analysis , dementia , developmental psychology , gerontology , medicine , psychiatry , paleontology , alternative medicine , disease , physical address , pathology , machine learning , computer science , programming language , psychotherapist , biology , overlay , placebo
Objectives We determined levels of cognitive functioning in community dwelling men aged 40–79 ( n = 3265) from eight European centres and investigated to what extent cognitive performance varied between centres, the association between different cognitive domains and age, educational level, co‐morbidity and lifestyle factors and the respective contributions of centre and individual factors to cognitive performance. Methods Cognitive domains assessed were visuo‐constructional ability and visual memory (Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure test, ROCF), topographical memory (Camden Topographical Recognition Memory test, CTRM) and processing speed (Digit‐Symbol Substitution test, DSST). Results There were significant between‐centre differences in all four cognitive test scores. Using multilevel linear regression analysis (MLRA), age, education, depression, physical performance and smoking were independent predictors of cognitive function and these variables explained 10–13% of the variation in cognitive scores between centres and 17–36% of the variation in scores between individuals within centres. Conclusion Our data suggest that although a proportion of the variance in cognitive function among European men is explained by individual level differences, a significant proportion is due to contextual phenomenon. Such contextual factors need to be considered when analysing multi‐centre data and European men should not be treated as homogeneous when assessing cognitive performance using existing instruments. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.