Skip to main content
. 2022 Mar 28;19(4):1181–1188. doi: 10.1007/s10433-022-00694-2

Table 2.

Associations between subjective memory concerns and cognition in the linear mixed modela

Differences in
Cognitive performance at wave 2 (column a) Cognitive change between waves over the subsequent 8 years (column b)
β2b (95% CI) P value β3b (95% CI) P value
CVLT immediate recall 0.02* 0.24
 “Remitting” vs “no” 0.23 (−0.43, −0.02)* 0.03* 0.03 (−0.08, 0.15) 0.59
 “New-onset” vs “no” −0.25 (−0.45, −0.04)* 0.02* 0.12 (0, 0.23)* 0.05*
 “Sustained” vs “no” −0.12 (−0.33, 0.1) 0.29 −0.01 (−0.13, 0.11) 0.90
CVLT delayed recall 0.36 0.20
 “Remitting” vs “no” −0.14 (−0.36, 0.08) 0.23 −0.04 (−0.24, 0.17) 0.72
 “New-onset” vs “no” −0.15 (−0.37, 0.07) 0.19 0.11 (−0.09, 0.32) 0.28
 “Sustained” vs “no” −0.09 (−0.32, 0.15) 0.47 −0.19 (−0.41, 0.02) 0.08
Symbol Digit Modalities 0.10 0.15
 “Remitting” vs “no” −0.13 (−0.36, 0.09) 0.24 −0.08 (−0.16, 0) 0.06
 “New-onset” vs “no” −0.07 (−0.29, 0.16) 0.56 0.02 (−0.06, 0.1) 0.68
 “Sustained” vs “no” −0.28 (−0.51, −0.04)* 0.02* 0.05 (−0.04, 0.14) 0.27
Trails A 0.04* 0.27
 “Remitting” vs “no” 1.08 (1.01, 1.15)* 0.02* 0.99 (0.96, 1.02) 0.57
 “New-onset” vs “no” 1.06 (1, 1.14) 0.06 0.97 (0.94, 1) 0.08
 “Sustained” vs “no” 1 (0.93, 1.07) 0.97 1.01 (0.98, 1.05) 0.51
Trails B 0.73 0.94
 “Remitting” vs “no” 1.01 (0.93, 1.09) 0.81 1.01 (0.97, 1.04) 0.79
 “New-onset” vs “no” 1.03 (0.95, 1.11) 0.47 1 (0.97, 1.04) 0.82
 “Sustained” vs “no” 1.04 (0.96, 1.13) 0.35 0.99 (0.95, 1.03) 0.61
Digit span backwards 0.05* 0.36
 “Remitting” vs “no” 0.2 (−0.02, 0.41) 0.07 −0.04 (−0.14, 0.05) 0.37
 “New-onset” vs “no” −0.12 (−0.33, 0.1) 0.29 0.07 (−0.02, 0.17) 0.14
 “Sustained” vs “no” −0.19 (−0.42, 0.04) 0.10 0.01 (−0.1, 0.11) 0.91
Purdue pegboard (dominant) 0.31 0.70
 “Remitting” vs “no” −0.17 (−0.39, 0.05) 0.13 0.03 (−0.09, 0.15) 0.58
 “New-onset” vs “no” −0.11 (−0.33, 0.11) 0.31 −0.06 (−0.18, 0.06) 0.33
 “Sustained” vs “no” −0.11 (−0.34, 0.13) 0.37 −0.02 (−0.14, 0.11) 0.76
Purdue pegboard (non-dominant) 0.01* 0.15
 “Remitting” vs “no” −0.26 (−0.49, −0.03)* 0.03* −0.02 (−0.15, 0.11) 0.74
 “New-onset” vs “no” 0.01 (−0.22, 0.24) 0.92 −0.15 (−0.27, −0.02)* 0.03*
 “Sustained” vs “no” −0.34 (−0.58, −0.09)* 0.007* 0.03 (−0.11, 0.16) 0.67
Purdue pegboard (both) 0.56 0.68
 “Remitting” vs “no” −0.1 (−0.33, 0.13) 0.39 −0.05 (−0.17, 0.07) 0.45
 “New-onset” vs “no” −0.13 (−0.36, 0.1) 0.27 0.03 (−0.09, 0.15) 0.60
 “Sustained” vs “no” −0.08 (−0.32, 0.16) 0.52 −0.05 (−0.17, 0.08) 0.44

CVLT denotes California Verbal Learning Test, CI confidence interval

aCVLT immediate recall, Symbol Digit Modalities, Trails A and B, digit span backwards and Purdue pegboard wave 2 to wave 4; CVLT delayed recall wave 2 to wave 3. For CVLT delayed recall, it is the subsequent 4 years, rather than 8 years

bCognitive test scores = intercept + β1 X time (i.e. wave 2 coded as 0, wave 3 coded as 1 and wave 4 coded as 2) + β2 X subjective memory concerns category (0 = ”no”, 1 = ”remitting”, 2 = ”new-onset”, 3 = ”sustained”) + β3 X time X subjective memory concerns category + adjusted variables

Adjusted for age, sex, English speaking, education, symptoms of anxiety and/or depression, body mass index, self-reported diabetes, hypertension, traumatic brain injury, smoking and physical activity

Time (seconds) used for trail making tests part A and B was log-transformed to form normal distributions. For ease of interpretation, we exponentiated the coefficients for trail making tests part A and B, e.g. an exponentiated coefficient of 1.01 represents a 1% increase in time