Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Jan 28.
Published in final edited form as: Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2013 Sep 8;22(7):642–652. doi: 10.1016/j.jagp.2012.10.029

Table 1.

Sample demographics.

Controls Cognitively Impaired
Chinese Caucasian Chinese Caucasian
Age F (2,276) = 23.05*¥ 60 (9.4) 67.7 (8.6) 73.8 (10.2) 70.7 (9.5)
Education (yrs) F (2,276) = 22.8*¥ 15.7 (3.3) 15.8 (2.4) 11.7 (5.7) 16 (2.4)
Gender (% male) χ2 = 6 (NS) 31% 27% 41% 46%
Diagnosis χ2 = 280* 100% Normal 100% Normal 53% MCI
47% AD
53% MCI
47% AD
Language χ2 = 251* 10% English Only
44% Bilingual
46% Chinese Only
- 10% English Only
19% Bilingual
71% Chinese Only
-
MMSE Score F (2,273) = 23.2* 28.9 (1.2) 29.5 (6.1) 22.9 (6.1) 23.8 (7.5)
CDR Score F (2,268) = 42.1* 0 0 0.67 (0.47) 0.76 (0.74)
Depression prevalence (GDS ≥ 6) χ2 = 33.8*¥ 6% 0% 35% 15%
Antidepressant use χ2 = 41*¥ 4% Yes
96% No
4% Yes
96% No
12% Yes
88% No
37% Yes
63% No
Prevalence Hypertension χ2 = 5.8 (NS) 35% Yes
65% No
40% Yes
60% No
52% Yes
48% No
37% Yes
63% No
Prevalence Diabetes χ2 = 21*¥ 13% Yes
87% No
4% Yes
96% No
22% Yes
78% No
2% Yes
98% No
Prevalence Hyperlipidemia χ2 = 2.4 (NS) 35% Yes
65% No
44% Yes
56% No
49% Yes
51% No
44% Yes
56% No
History Myocardial Infarct χ2 = 3 (NS) 0% Yes
100% No
0% Yes
100% No
3% Yes
97% No
2% Yes
98% No
History Stroke χ2 = 7 (NS) 2% Yes
98% No
0% Yes
100% No
8% Yes
92% No
2% Yes
98% No
*

= Significant across four groups (ANOVA or χ2)

= Significantly different in Normal Chinese vs. Normal Caucasian

¥

= Significantly different in Impaired Chinese vs. Impaired Caucasian

Sample Demographics are provided for control and cognitively impaired individuals by ethnicity. Test statistics (F statistic for ANOVA or χ2) are provided along with significance across groups as indicated by symbols (p < 0.05).“NS” means there were no significant differences between or across groups.