Skip to main content

Table 1 Study characteristics

From: Is intracranial volume a suitable proxy for brain reserve?

Study

n

Subjects

Age

Male (%)

Education (years)

Design

Nuisance

Corrected for

Outcome

Effect

Quantitative assessment

Mori, 1997* [41]

60

Mild to moderate AD

70.2 (7.1)

38.3

8.9 (2.3)

Cross-sectional

Age, sex, education

Atrophy

ADAS-Coga

−0.12

     

WAIS-R Full IQe

0.40

Staff, 2004 [58]

98

Unknown

79

57.6

9.8 (1.6)

Cross-sectional

Childhood IQ, sex

WMH

AVLT Memoryb

0.00

        

RPMe

0.01

Christensen, 2009 [15]

416

Unknown

62.6 (1.4)

52

14 (2.6)

Longitudinal, 4-year change

Age, sex, education

Atrophy and WMH

SDMTc

−0.22

     

CVLT: Immediateb

−0.39

        

CVLT: Delayedb

−1.45 †

Farias, 2012 [18]

401

Mixed HC, MCI and dementia

75 (6.9)

37.3

12.3 (4.8)

Cross-sectional

Sex, height

TBV, hippocampal volume, and WMH

SENAS: Semantic memoryb

0.20

       

Episodic memoryb

0.08

        

Executive functionc

0.27

        

Spatial abilityd

0.16

Royle, 2013 [50]

327

HC

72.5 (0.7)

100

–

Cross-sectional

Age

TBV

Composite scorea

0.19

      

GM and WM

0.22

 

297

 

72.6 (0.73)

0

–

  

TBV

0.21

        

GM and WM

0.23

Groot, 2018 [22]

201

Aβ+ preclinical and prodromal AD

66.6 (7.5)

53

10–11**

Cross-sectional

Age, sex, education, scanner

Atrophy

Memoryb

0.12

     

Attentionc

0.06

       

Executivec

0.18

        

Languagef

−0.03

        

Visuospatiald

0.14

        

MMSEa

0.16

 

462

Aβ+ probable AD

66.1 (7.4)

47

10–11**

   

Memoryb

0.10

       

Attentionc

0.14

         

Executivec

0.15

         

Languagef

0.05

         

Visuospatiald

0.13

         

MMSEa

0.15

Categorical assessment

Wolf, 2004 [69]

73

HC, MCI

79.1

49.3

11.3

Cross-sectional

Education

Left hippocampus

Predicting HC vs MCI (OR)

1.04***

 

70

MCI, dementia

78.7

34.3

10.8

 

Age

RBV

Predicting MCI vs dementia (OR)

1.05***

Wolf, 2004 [70]

167

HC, MCI, AD, VaD

60.7 (9.9)

43

–

Cross-sectional

Age, sex

Hippocampal atrophy (visual assessment)

HC vs cognitive impairment (OR compared with smallest quartile)

2.9

Silbert, 2009 [56]

49

HC (at baseline)

84.1 (6.2)

47

14.5 (2.7)

Longitudinal, 10-year change

Age, MMSE, APOEe4 status.

ΔWMH, ΔvCSF, and hippocampal, vCSF and WMH

Persistent cognitive decline (HR)

1.0

Negash, 2013 [44]

54

Aβ+ HC and AD

72.7

42.6

14.4

Cross-sectional

Age, sex, education, APOEe4 status

MTL volume

Resilience (normal despite Aβ+; OR)

1.01

        

Hippocampal and posterior cingulate volume

 

1.01

  1. Bold effects are reported to be significant according to study-specific statistical thresholds
  2. Aβ amyloid-beta, AD Alzheimer’s disease, ADAS-Cog Amsterdam dementia assessment scale—cognitive subscale, APOEε4 apolipoprotein ε4, AVLT auditory verbal learning test, CVLT California verbal learning test, GM gray matter, HC healthy controls, HR hazard ratio, ICV intracranial volume, IQ intelligence quotient, MCI mild cognitive impairment, MMSE Mini-Mental State Examination, MTL medial temporal lobe, OR odds ratio, RBV relative brain volume (brain volume to ICV ratio), RPM Raven’s progressive matrices, SDMT symbol-digit modalities test, SENAS Spanish-English neuropsychological assessment scale, TBV total brain volume, VaD vascular dementia, vCSF ventricular cerebrospinal fluid, WAIS-R Wechsler adult intelligence scale-revised, WM white matter, WMH white matter hyperintensity
  3. *Premorbid brain volume calculated as regression coefficient of (age + sex + ICV = whole brain volume) multiplied by ICV + constant
  4. **Categorization according to the Verhage scale [65] converted into years
  5. ***Odds ratios calculated from β coefficients using e^(β)
  6. †This effect was considered an outlier and was not included in the meta-analysis
  7. aGlobal cognition
  8. bMemory
  9. cAttention/executive functions
  10. dVisuospatial ability
  11. eIntelligence
  12. fLanguage
Back to article page

Alzheimer's Research & Therapy

ISSN: 1758-9193