Risk of progression to Alzheimer’s disease for different neuropsychological Mild Cognitive Impairment subtypes: A hierarchical meta-analysis of longitudinal studies

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10045/83849
Información del item - Informació de l'item - Item information
Title: Risk of progression to Alzheimer’s disease for different neuropsychological Mild Cognitive Impairment subtypes: A hierarchical meta-analysis of longitudinal studies
Authors: Oltra-Cucarella, Javier | Ferrer-Cascales, Rosario | Alegret, Montserrat | Gasparini, Ruth | Díaz-Ortiz, Leslie Michelle | Ríos, Rocío | Martínez-Nogueras, Ángel Luis | Onandia, Iban | Pérez-Vicente, José A. | Cabello-Rodríguez, Luis | Sánchez San Segundo, Miriam
Research Group/s: Psicología Aplicada a la Salud y Comportamiento Humano (PSYBHE)
Center, Department or Service: Universidad de Alicante. Departamento de Psicología de la Salud
Keywords: Alzheimer’s disease | Mild Cognitive Impairment | Dementia | Meta-analysis | Robust variance estimator
Knowledge Area: Personalidad, Evaluación y Tratamiento Psicológico
Issue Date: Nov-2018
Publisher: American Psychological Association
Citation: Psychology and Aging. 2018, 33(7): 1007-1021. doi:10.1037/pag0000294
Abstract: Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) is a heterogeneous condition between normal aging and dementia. Upon neuropsychological testing, MCI can be divided into 4 groups: single-domain amnestic MCI (sd-aMCI), multiple-domain amnestic MCI (md-aMCI), single- and multiple-domain nonamnestic MCI (sd-naMCI, md-naMCI). Some controversy exists about whether the risk of progression to Alzheimer’s disease (risk-AD) is increased in all MCI subtypes. We meta-analyzed the risk-AD for 4 MCI groups using random-effects metaregression with the Hierarchical Robust Variance Estimator and sample size, criterion for objective cognitive impairment, length of follow-up and source of recruitment as covariates. From a pool of 134 available studies, 81 groups from 33 studies (N = 4,907) were meta-analyzed. All the studies were rated as having a high risk of bias. aMCI is overrepresented in studies from memory clinics. Multivariate analyses showed that md-aMCI had a similar risk-AD relative to sd-aMCI, whereas both sd-naMCI and md-naMCI showed a lower risk-AD compared with sd-aMCI. The risk-AD was significantly associated with differences in sample sizes across studies and between groups within studies. md-aMCI had a similar risk-AD relative to sd-aMCI in studies from memory clinics and in studies in the community. Several potential sources of bias such as blindness of AD diagnosis, the MCI diagnosis approach and the reporting of demographics were associated with the risk-AD. This work provides important data for use in both clinical and research scenarios.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10045/83849
ISSN: 0882-7974 (Print) | 1939-1498 (Online)
DOI: 10.1037/pag0000294
Language: eng
Type: info:eu-repo/semantics/article
Rights: © 2018 American Psychological Association
Peer Review: si
Publisher version: https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000294
Appears in Collections:INV - PSYBHE - Artículos de Revistas

Files in This Item:
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Thumbnail2018_Oltra-Cucarella_etal_PsycholAging_accepted.pdfAccepted Manuscript (acceso abierto)1,44 MBAdobe PDFOpen Preview

Items in RUA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.