Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
BackgroundCognitive reserve (CR) is considered a protective factor for cognitive function and may explain interindividual differences of cognitive performance given similar levels of neurodegeneration, e.g., in Alzheimer´s disease. Recent evidence suggests that CR is also relevant in Parkinson's disease (PD).ObjectiveWe aimed to explore the role of life-stage specific CR for overall cognition and specific cognitive domains cross-sectionally and longitudinally in PD.MethodsThe cross-sectional analysis with data from the DEMPARK/LANDSCAPE study included 81 individuals without cognitive impairment (PD-N) and 87 individuals with mild cognitive impairment (PD-MCI). Longitudinal data covered 4 years with over 500 observations. CR was operationalized with the Lifetime of Experiences Questionnaire (LEQ), capturing the complexity of lifestyle activities across distinct life-stages. Cognition was assessed using a comprehensive neuropsychological test battery.ResultsHigher LEQ scores, particularly from mid- and late-life, were observed in PD-N compared to PD-MCI [F(1,153) = 4.609, p = .033, ηp2 = 0.029]. They were significantly associated with better cognitive performance (0.200 ≤ β ≤ 0.292). Longitudinally, linear mixed effect models (0.236 ≤ marginal R2 ≤ 0.441) revealed that LEQ scores were positively related to cognitive performance independent of time. However, the decline in overall cognition and memory over time was slightly more pronounced with higher LEQ scores.ConclusionsThis study emphasizes the association between complex lifestyle activities and cognition in PD. Data indicate that while CR might be related to a delay of cognitive decline, individuals with high CR may experience a more pronounced drop in overall cognition and memory. Future studies will have to replicate these findings, particularly regarding domain-specific effects and considering reverse causal mechanisms.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.