Skip to main content
. 2023 May 31;15:101. doi: 10.1186/s13195-023-01218-5

Table 1.

Demographic and clinical features of study participants

CU CI-NAD CI-AD P-value
ANOVA b CI-NAD vs CI-AD c
N 13 38 34
Age (years) 69.6 (7.1) 69.8 (7.4) 70.8 (6.1) .796  > .999
Female 7 (54%) 21 (55%) 16 (47%) .775 .487
Education (years) 9.1 (5.2) 8.5 (3.9) 8.7 (4.5)  > .999  > .999
Body mass indexa 25.0 (3.4) 25.3 (3.8) 24.9 (2.9)  > .999  > .999
APOEe4 carrier statusd 2 (18%) 3 (9%) 20 (65%)  < .001  < .001
General cognition
 Mini-Mental State Examination 28.3 (1.2) 24.8 (3.9) 22.2 (5.1)  < .001 0.101
 ADAScog 8.2 (3.3) 15.3 (9.5) 17.1 (7.6)  < .001 .330
Clinical stage
 Mild cognitive impairment - 21 (55%) 22 (65%) .415
 Dementia - 17 (45%) 12 (35%) .415
Amyloid load (PET SUVr) .95 (.07) .92 (.09) 1.31 (.13)  < .001  < .001

Figure denotes mean (SD) and number (%)

Abbreviations: CU: cognitively unimpaired persons; CI-NAD: patients with cognitive impairment not due to AD; CI-AD: patients with cognitive impairment due to AD; ADAScog: Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale, cognitive subscale; PET: Positron emission tomography; SUVr: Standardized uptake value ratio

a Weight/height2 and measured in kg/cm2

b Statistical difference among the 3 groups by ANOVA, Kruskal–Wallis, or chi-squared test

c P values of pairwise comparisons using Bonferroni correction

d Missing data for 8 participants: 2 in CU, 4 in CI-NAD, and 3 in CI-AD