ArticlePloS one2025
Aging dimensions and markers as relative predictors of mortality in a longitudinal epidemiological sample.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Gender differences in the association between marriage and epigenetic age.Frontiers in aging · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Measurement of aging is critical to understanding its causes and developing interventions, but little consensus exists on what components such measurements should include or how they perform in predicting mortality. The aim of this study was to identify factors of aging among a comprehensive set of indicators, and to evaluate their relative performance in predicting mortality. Measurements on 34 clinical, survey, and neuroimaging variables, along with epigenetic age markers, were obtained from two waves (2004-2021) of the Midlife in the United States (MIDUS) study. Mortality data was also available on 11875 participants, including 1908 twins. Factor analyses were used to identify aging factors, and these were used to predict mortality as of 2022. Twin data were used to model predictors of mortality within families. Factor analyses identified 9 major dimensions of aging: frailty, cognition, adiposity, glucose, blood pressure, inflammation, lipids, adaptive functioning, and neurological functioning. The strongest predictors of survival among the aging dimensions were cognition, adaptive functioning, and inflammation, and among the epigenetic markers, the decline-predictive markers (GrimAge and DunedinPACE). When entered in joint prediction models, cognition remained a significant predictor of mortality, but the epigenetic markers did not. Cognition, adaptive functioning, and inflammation remained significant predictors of mortality within twin pairs as well. Aging is a multidimensional construct, with cognition, adaptive functioning, and inflammation being the strongest predictors of survival among the aging dimensions examined. Their association with mortality is observed within families, suggesting that early developmental factors cannot entirely account for their association with survival. Interventions and assessments should prioritize cognition in measures of aging quality, along with adaptive functioning and inflammation.
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.