| Title |
The relationship of individual social activity and cognitive function of community Chinese elderly: a cross-sectional study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ndt.s160036 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xiufang Su, Xingbing Huang, Yu Jin, Shouwen Wan, Zili Han |
| Abstract |
The prevention of cognitive impairment is a crucial public health issue, and leisure activities have been studied as the strategy of the cognitive preservation. The aim of the study was to explore the possible relationship between social activity and cognitive function among community-dwelling Chinese elderly in two big cities of Southern China. Altogether, 557 nondemented older adults aged 60 years and older (73.4±6.5 years) were recruited in the social centers in Hong Kong and Guangzhou. A leisure activity questionnaire was used to measure the social activity participation. Cognitive function was examined using a neuropsychological battery. The association between social activity and cognitive function was analyzed using the multiple linear regression analysis. Social activities had a weak relationship with cognitive performance when measured in terms of overall participation. Attending an interest class had significant association with the Cantonese version of Mini Mental State Examination, the word list learning test, the delayed recall test, and the trail making test. Religious activity showed significant association with the word list learning test and the digit vigilance test. Singing had significant association with the Category Verbal Fluency Test (CVFT) and the trail making test. Some individual social activity items may be associated with better cognitive function among the community Chinese elderly independently of other factors. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 51 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 16% |
| Unknown | 23 | 45% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 8% |
| Psychology | 4 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 24 | 47% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 September 2018.
All research outputs
#3,562,978
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#525
of 3,131 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,019
of 341,886 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#10
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,131 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 341,886 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.