4.5 Article

Change in stress and social support as predictors of cognitive decline in older adults with and without depression

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GERIATRIC PSYCHIATRY
卷 26, 期 12, 页码 1267-1274

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/gps.2676

关键词

depression; elderly; cognition; stress; social support

资金

  1. National Institute of Mental Health [P50 MH 60451, R01 MH54846, K24 MH70027, K01 MH066380, K23 MH087741]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The relationship between stress, social support, and cognition in geriatric depression is complex. In this study, we sought to examine whether an increase in stressful life events or a decrease in social support would lead to subsequent cognitive decline among older adults with and without depression. Methods: The sample consisted of 112 depressed and 101 non-depressed older adults who enrolled in the Neurocognitive Outcomes of Depression in the Elderly (NCODE) study. Participants were assessed clinically, agreed to interviews focusing on stressful life events and social support, and underwent a battery of neuropsychological tests annually. Our global measure of cognition was the Consortium to Establish a Registry in Alzheimer's disease Total Score (CERAD TS). Results: We found that a decline in the total number of stressors was associated with a subsequent improvement on CERAD TS. In terms of social support, decreased social interaction, and instrumental social support predicted decline in cognitive performance. These relationships were significant even after controlling for depression status, age, education, and sex. Conclusions: These findings extend prior research on the importance of social factors in aging and depression which have largely focused on mood-related outcomes. Future confirmatory studies are needed. In addition, biological and other studies should be conducted to further our understanding of the relationship between stress, social support and cognition in older adults with and without depression. Copyright (C) 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据