ArticleAnnals of clinical and translational neurology2026
The McCance Brain Care Score and Mortality: Evidence From a Large-Scale Population-Based Cohort.
Article in Annals of clinical and translational neurology, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to examine the relationship between the McCance Brain Care Score (BCS) and mortality in the general population.
methodsWe conducted a prospective, population-based cohort study using data from the UK Biobank. Participants with complete data enabling calculation of BCS and full mortality information were included. For the longitudinal component, participants without follow-up BCS data were excluded. Mortality information was obtained via the National Health Service (NHS) Information Centre (England and Wales) and the NHS Central Register Scotland, with follow-up through December 31, 2022.
resultsA total of 331,894 participants were included (mean age 56.46 ± 8.07 years; 54.2% women; 91.8% White). Over a median follow-up of 13.83 years (IQR 13.11-14.55), 27,446 deaths (8.27%) occurred. Higher baseline BCS was significantly associated with lower all-cause mortality. As a continuous variable, each 1-point increase in BCS corresponded to a 6% lower risk of death (fully adjusted HR = 0.94; 95% CI 0.94-0.95; p < 0.001). When analyzed in 5-point increments, participants with BCS 5-10, 10-15, and ≥ 15 had 40%, 53%, and 55% lower mortality risks, respectively, compared with the reference group (BCS < 5) (all p < 0.001; p for trend < 0.001). Cause-specific analyses revealed inverse associations between BCS and death from malignant neoplasm (HR = 0.95; 95% CI 0.94-0.95), heart disease (HR = 0.90; 95% CI 0.89-0.92), cerebrovascular disease (HR = 0.96; 95% CI 0.94-0.98), respiratory disease (HR = 0.92; 95% CI 0.90-0.94), and diabetes (HR = 0.90; 95% CI 0.84-0.96) (all p ≤ 0.001). In longitudinal analyses of 7114 participants with repeated BCS measurements over a median 4.52 years, persistently high BCS was associated with a 50% lower mortality risk compared with persistently low BCS (HR = 0.50; 95% CI 0.29-0.87).
interpretationThese findings suggest that BCS is a practical tool reflecting healthy lifestyle behaviors and clinical measures, aiding early identification of individuals at high risk of mortality and showing promise in health management. Further studies are needed to explore its mechanisms and confirm causality.
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.