↓ Skip to main content

Social Function and Cognitive Status: Results from a US Nationally Representative Survey of Older Adults

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of General Internal Medicine, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
9 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
14 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
97 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
130 Mendeley
Title
Social Function and Cognitive Status: Results from a US Nationally Representative Survey of Older Adults
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, April 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11606-016-3696-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ashwin A. Kotwal, Juyeon Kim, Linda Waite, William Dale

Abstract

An early sign of cognitive decline in older adults is often a disruption in social function, but our understanding of this association is limited. We aimed to determine whether those screening positive for early stages of cognitive impairment have differences across multiple dimensions of social function and whether associations differ by gender. United States nationally representative cohort (2010), the National Social life, Health, and Aging Project (NSHAP). Community-dwelling adults aged 62-90 years (N = 3,310) with a response rate of 76.9 %. Cognition was measured using a survey adaptation of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment categorized into three groups: normal, mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and dementia. We measured three domains of social relationships, each comprised of two scales: network structure (size and density), social resources (social support and social strain), and social engagement (community involvement and socializing). We used multiple linear regression to characterize the relationship of each social relationship measure to cognition. Individuals screened as at risk for MCI and early dementia had smaller network sizes by 0.3 and 0.6 individuals (p < 0.001), and a 10 % and 25 % increase in network density (p < 0.001), respectively. For social resources, individuals at risk for MCI and dementia had 4 % and 14 % less social strain (p = 0.01), but only women had 3 % and 6 % less perceived social support (p = 0.013), respectively. For social engagement, individuals screened positive for MCI and dementia had 8 % and 19 % less community involvement (p = 0.01), but only men had 8 % and 13 % increased social involvement with neighbors and family members (p < 0.001), respectively. Changes in social functioning provide an early indication to screen for cognitive loss. Recognition that early cognitive loss is associated with differences in social function can guide counseling efforts and help identify social vulnerabilities to ease the transition to overt dementia for both patients and caregivers.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 130 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 127 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 15%
Student > Master 16 12%
Researcher 14 11%
Student > Bachelor 13 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 7%
Other 22 17%
Unknown 36 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 22 17%
Psychology 21 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 10%
Neuroscience 4 3%
Other 15 12%
Unknown 38 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 78. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 April 2019.
All research outputs
#555,500
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#439
of 8,256 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,005
of 315,441 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#7
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,256 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 315,441 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.