{"title":"Instruments to Assess Cognitive Reserve Among Older Adults: a Systematic Review of Measurement Properties.","authors":"Wanrui Wei, Kairong Wang, Jiyuan Shi, Zheng Li","doi":"10.1007/s11065-023-09594-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Cognitive reserve explains the differences in the susceptibility to cognitive impairment related to brain aging, pathology, or insult. Given that cognitive reserve has important implications for the cognitive health of typically and pathologically aging older adults, research needs to identify valid and reliable instruments for measuring cognitive reserve. However, the measurement properties of current cognitive reserve instruments used in older adults have not been evaluated according to the most up-to-date COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN). This systematic review aimed to critically appraise, compare, and summarize the quality of the measurement properties of all existing cognitive reserve instruments for older adults. A systematic literature search was performed to identify relevant studies published up to December 2021, which was conducted by three of four researchers using 13 electronic databases and snowballing method. The COSMIN was used to assess the methodological quality of the studies and the quality of measurement properties. Out of the 11,338 retrieved studies, only seven studies that concerned five instruments were eventually included. The methodological quality of one-fourth of the included studies was doubtful and three-seventh was very good, while only four measurement properties from two instruments were supported by high-quality evidence. Overall, current studies and evidence for selecting cognitive reserve instruments suitable for older adults were insufficient. All included instruments have the potential to be recommended, while none of the identified cognitive reserve instruments for older adults appears to be generally superior to the others. Therefore, further studies are recommended to validate the measurement properties of existing cognitive reserve instruments for older adults, especially the content validity as guided by COSMIN.Systematic Review Registration numbers: CRD42022309399 (PROSPERO).</p>","PeriodicalId":49754,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychology Review","volume":" ","pages":"511-529"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuropsychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-023-09594-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Cognitive reserve explains the differences in the susceptibility to cognitive impairment related to brain aging, pathology, or insult. Given that cognitive reserve has important implications for the cognitive health of typically and pathologically aging older adults, research needs to identify valid and reliable instruments for measuring cognitive reserve. However, the measurement properties of current cognitive reserve instruments used in older adults have not been evaluated according to the most up-to-date COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN). This systematic review aimed to critically appraise, compare, and summarize the quality of the measurement properties of all existing cognitive reserve instruments for older adults. A systematic literature search was performed to identify relevant studies published up to December 2021, which was conducted by three of four researchers using 13 electronic databases and snowballing method. The COSMIN was used to assess the methodological quality of the studies and the quality of measurement properties. Out of the 11,338 retrieved studies, only seven studies that concerned five instruments were eventually included. The methodological quality of one-fourth of the included studies was doubtful and three-seventh was very good, while only four measurement properties from two instruments were supported by high-quality evidence. Overall, current studies and evidence for selecting cognitive reserve instruments suitable for older adults were insufficient. All included instruments have the potential to be recommended, while none of the identified cognitive reserve instruments for older adults appears to be generally superior to the others. Therefore, further studies are recommended to validate the measurement properties of existing cognitive reserve instruments for older adults, especially the content validity as guided by COSMIN.Systematic Review Registration numbers: CRD42022309399 (PROSPERO).
期刊介绍：
Neuropsychology Review is a quarterly, refereed publication devoted to integrative review papers on substantive content areas in neuropsychology, with particular focus on populations with endogenous or acquired conditions affecting brain and function and on translational research providing a mechanistic understanding of clinical problems. Publication of new data is not the purview of the journal. Articles are written by international specialists in the field, discussing such complex issues as distinctive functional features of central nervous system disease and injury; challenges in early diagnosis; the impact of genes and environment on function; risk factors for functional impairment; treatment efficacy of neuropsychological rehabilitation; the role of neuroimaging, neuroelectrophysiology, and other neurometric modalities in explicating function; clinical trial design; neuropsychological function and its substrates characteristic of normal development and aging; and neuropsychological dysfunction and its substrates in neurological, psychiatric, and medical conditions. The journal''s broad perspective is supported by an outstanding, multidisciplinary editorial review board guided by the aim to provide students and professionals, clinicians and researchers with scholarly articles that critically and objectively summarize and synthesize the strengths and weaknesses in the literature and propose novel hypotheses, methods of analysis, and links to other fields.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
