ReviewFrontiers in psychiatry2026
Factors affecting subjective cognitive decline in older adults based on the health ecological model: a scoping review.
Review in Frontiers in psychiatry, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To systematically review and synthesize the factors influencing subjective cognitive decline (SCD) in older adults based on the Health Ecological Model (HEM), and to provide direction for future research. Methods: Relevant literature on factors influencing SCD in older adults was retrieved from five databases (CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, PubMed, and Web of Science) from database inception to October 18, 2025. Results: A total of 33 articles were included, comprising 21 Chinese and 12 English articles, with sample sizes ranging from 212 to 74,472 participants. The influencing factors were diverse and complex. According to the HEM, these factors were categorized into four dimensions: personal characteristics, behavioral characteristics, interpersonal networks, and living and working conditions. Notably, none of the 33 studies addressed the fifth dimension-the policy environment-highlighting a significant research gap. Conclusion: The reported prevalence of SCD varies considerably across assessment tools and geographic locations, particularly in rural areas and among older adults. Four dimensions of influencing factors were identified: personal characteristics, behavioral characteristics, interpersonal networks, and living and working conditions. None of the 33 included studies addressed the policy environment dimension, highlighting a significant research gap. Limitations include the predominant use of self-reported tools, reliance on cross-sectional designs, and geographic concentration, limiting generalizability. Future research should integrate objective methods, prioritize longitudinal designs, investigate policy influences, and include diverse populations for culturally tailored prevention.
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.