Cognitive frailty typologies and subsequent dementia in a large representative sample of the English population
Abstract
Background: Cognitive Frailty (CF), the coexistence of mild cognitive impairment with physical frailty, may represent an intermediate state between functional vulnerability and preclinical dementia. Its potential reversibility makes it an important target for prevention. Distinguishing patterns of CF that are more and less likely to lead to dementia, and associated factors, is important for developing interventions.
Methods: Using data from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (Waves 4-9), we examined different typologies of CF based on specific cognitive impairments demonstrated. We compared longitudinal outcomes of incident dementia over 10 years for the different typologies. We also examined the impact of inequalities (Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) and household wealth), cognitive reserve (low education), and psychosocial factors (depression and loneliness) on the longitudinal models.
Results: CF groups with executive function (using verbal fluency) and/or processing speed impairment (Group 1) are distinguished from those with memory impairment only (Group 2) or impaired memory and executive function and/or processing speed (Group 3). Inequalities, cognitive reserve and psychosocial factors all show association with CF likelihood, but education (odds ratio (OR) of no qualifications compared to degree/higher education = 1.632 (Group 1) and 3.436 (Group 3)), IMD (OR 1.656 (Group 1 quintile 5), 2.083 (Group 3 quintile 4) compared to quintile 1) and loneliness (OR 1.208 (Group 1), 1.185 (Group 3)) are only associated with CF where executive function/processing speed are key characteristics. Longitudinally, only CF groupings with memory impairment (OR 2.024, Group 2; 2.733, Group 3) are predictive of dementia.
Conclusions: Distinguishing typologies of CF and associated risk factors is important for estimating future dementia risk, and for targeted design of interventions.
Related
- Genetic Polymorphisms in SORL1, CLU, BIN1, and VDR Are Associated with Mild Cognitive Impairment and Dementia in a Russian Population.
- Patterns of cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic (CKM) syndrome stages and prevalence of lifestyle risk factors in a nationally representative iranian population study
- Kaiser Permanente National Cross-Vendor Validation of Mammography Artificial Intelligence Computer-Aided Diagnosis Algorithms in a US-Representative Population
- Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and odds of subsequent multiple sclerosis: a population-based retrospective case–control study
- Getting the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 Ready for Clinical Practice: Population-Representative Norms That Embrace Uncertainty
BibTeX
@article{clarkson2026cognitive,
title = {{Cognitive frailty typologies and subsequent dementia in a large representative sample of the English population}},
author = {Daniel Clarkson and Dorina Cadar and Carol Holland},
journal = {Communications Medicine},
year = {2026},
month = nov,
doi = {10.1038/s43856-026-01988-7},
url = {https://www.nature.com/articles/s43856-026-01988-7},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Cognitive frailty typologies and subsequent dementia in a large representative sample of the English population
AU - Daniel Clarkson
AU - Dorina Cadar
AU - Carol Holland
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/11/02
JO - Communications Medicine
DO - 10.1038/s43856-026-01988-7
UR - https://www.nature.com/articles/s43856-026-01988-7
AB - Background: Cognitive Frailty (CF), the coexistence of mild cognitive impairment with physical frailty, may represent an intermediate state between functional vulnerability and preclinical dementia. Its potential reversibility makes it an important target for prevention. Distinguishing patterns of CF that are more and less likely to lead to dementia, and associated factors, is important for developing interventions. Methods: Using data from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (Waves 4-9), we examined different typologies of CF based on specific cognitive impairments demonstrated. We compared longitudinal outcomes of incident dementia over 10 years for the different typologies. We also examined the impact of inequalities (Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) and household wealth), cognitive reserve (low education), and psychosocial factors (depression and loneliness) on the longitudinal models. Results: CF groups with executive function (using verbal fluency) and/or processing speed impairment (Group 1) are distinguished from those with memory impairment only (Group 2) or impaired memory and executive function and/or processing speed (Group 3). Inequalities, cognitive reserve and psychosocial factors all show association with CF likelihood, but education (odds ratio (OR) of no qualifications compared to degree/higher education = 1.632 (Group 1) and 3.436 (Group 3)), IMD (OR 1.656 (Group 1 quintile 5), 2.083 (Group 3 quintile 4) compared to quintile 1) and loneliness (OR 1.208 (Group 1), 1.185 (Group 3)) are only associated with CF where executive function/processing speed are key characteristics. Longitudinally, only CF groupings with memory impairment (OR 2.024, Group 2; 2.733, Group 3) are predictive of dementia. Conclusions: Distinguishing typologies of CF and associated risk factors is important for estimating future dementia risk, and for targeted design of interventions.
SN - 2730-664X
ER -