ArticleJournal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD2025
Sex differences in cognitive trajectories and practice effects in a cohort of older Londoners: The role of risk factors.
Article in Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BackgroundSex differences in cognitive abilities have been reported; however, the underlying reasons remain unclear.ObjectiveTo (i) investigate sex differences in cognitive performance, (ii) evaluate the contributions of established dementia risk factors to these differences, and (iii) examine the role of non-modifiable risk factors on sex differences in cognitive performance.MethodsAmong 964 cognitively unimpaired participants (aged 60-85) of the UK CHARIOT-PRO Main Study, we assessed cross-sectional and longitudinal associations, over up to 3 years of follow-up, between sex and cognitive performance, using the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS).ResultsSex differences, mostly favoring women were observed at baseline across almost all RBANS indices including the total scale (Cohen's d = 0.3, adjusted mean difference in score = -5.4, p < 0.001). Sex differences were observed in Practice effects (PEs), with men showing less PE in almost all cognitive domains including the total scale (adjusted 1.3, p = 0.002). Greater sex differences in PEs, were documented among the 'older' participants in two out of five cognitive domains including the immediate memory index (mean difference: older (69-85 years) group = -3.2, p = 0.002); younger (60-68 years) group = -0.8, p = 0.4). Sex differences were more pronounced among 'Apolipoprotein-Ꜫ4 -carriers' in three out of five domains including the total scale (mean difference in carriers = -2.6, p = 0.002); non-carriers = -0.7, p = 0.3).ConclusionsSex differences in cognition and PE were observed after adjusting for risk factors associated with Alzheimer's disease. Future studies should also consider the effects of sex on non-modifiable risk factors and PEs to identify potential 'masked' neuropathology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.