ObjectiveInvestigate the protective effect of multilingualism on cognition in seniors.MethodsAs part of the MemoVie study conducted on 232 non-demented volunteers aged 65 and more, neurogeriatric and neuropsychological evaluations were performed. Participants were classified as presenting either cognitive impairment without dementia (CIND) or being free of any cognitive impairment (CIND-free). Language practices, socio-demographic data and lifestyle habits were recorded. In this retrospective nested case-control design, we used as proxies of multilingualism: number of languages practiced, age of acquisition and duration of practice, emphasizing the temporal pattern of acquisition, and the resulting practice of several languages sequentially or concomitantly during various periods of life. This special angle on the matter offered to our work a dimension particularly original and innovative.Results44 subjects (19%) had CIND, the others were cognitively normal. All practiced from 2 to 7 languages. When compared with bilinguals, participants who practiced more than 2 languages presented a lower risk of CIND, after adjustment for education and age (odds ratio (OR) = 0.30, 95% confidence limits (95%CL) = [0.10–0.92]). Progressing from 2 to 3 languages, instead of staying bilingual, was associated with a 7-fold protection against CIND (OR = 0.14, 95%CL = [0.04–0.45], p = 0.0010). A one year delay to reach multilingualism (3 languages practiced being the threshold) multiplied the risk of CIND by 1.022 (OR = 1.022, 95%CL = [1.01–1.04], p = 0.0044). Also noteworthy, just as for multilingualism, an impact of cognitively stimulating activities on the occurrence of CIND was found as well (OR = 0.979, 95%CL = [0.961–0.998], p = 0.033).ConclusionThe study did not show independence of multilingualism and CIND. Rather it seems to show a strong association toward a protection against CIND. Practicing multilingualism from early life on, and/or learning it at a fast pace is even more efficient. This protection might be related to the enhancement of cognitive reserve and brain plasticity, thereby preserving brain functions from alterations during aging.
Background To accompany the lifting of COVID-19 lockdown measures, Luxembourg implemented a mass screening (MS) programme. The first phase coincided with an early summer epidemic wave in 2020. Methods rRT-PCR-based screening for SARS-CoV-2 was performed by pooling of samples. The infrastructure allowed the testing of the entire resident and cross-border worker populations. The strategy relied on social connectivity within different activity sectors. Invitation frequencies were tactically increased in sectors and regions with higher prevalence. The results were analysed alongside contact tracing data. Findings The voluntary programme covered 49% of the resident and 22% of the cross-border worker populations. It identified 850 index cases with an additional 249 cases from contact tracing. Over-representation was observed in the services, hospitality and construction sectors alongside regional differences. Asymptomatic cases had a significant but lower secondary attack rate when compared to symptomatic individuals. Based on simulations using an agent-based SEIR model, the total number of expected cases would have been 42·9% (90% CI [-0·3, 96·7]) higher without MS. Mandatory participation would have resulted in a further difference of 39·7% [19·6, 59·2]. Interpretation Strategic and tactical MS allows the suppression of epidemic dynamics. Asymptomatic carriers represent a significant risk for transmission. Containment of future outbreaks will depend on early testing in sectors and regions. Higher participation rates must be assured through targeted incentivisation and recurrent invitation. Funding This project was funded by the Luxembourg Ministries of Higher Education and Research, and Health.
BackgroundIt is challenging to manage data collection as planned and creation of opportunities to adapt during the course of enrolment may be needed. This paper aims to summarize the different sampling strategies adopted in the second wave of Observation of Cardiovascular Risk Factors (ORISCAV-LUX, 2016–17), with a focus on population coverage and sample representativeness.MethodsData from the first nationwide cross-sectional, population-based ORISCAV-LUX survey, 2007–08 and from the newly complementary sample recruited via different pathways, nine years later were analysed. First, we compare the socio-demographic characteristics and health profiles between baseline participants and non-participants to the second wave. Then, we describe the distribution of subjects across different strategy-specific samples and performed a comparison of the overall ORISCAV-LUX2 sample to the national population according to stratification criteria.ResultsFor the baseline sample (1209 subjects), the participants (660) were younger than the non-participants (549), with a significant difference in average ages (44 vs 45.8 years; P = 0.019). There was a significant difference in terms of education level (P < 0.0001), 218 (33%) participants having university qualification vs. 95 (18%) non-participants. The participants seemed having better health perception (p < 0.0001); 455 (70.3%) self-reported good or very good health perception compared to 312 (58.2%) non-participants. The prevalence of obesity (P < 0.0001), hypertension (P < 0.0001), diabetes (P = 0.007), and mean values of related biomarkers were significantly higher among the non-participants. The overall sample (1558 participants) was mainly composed of randomly selected subjects, including 660 from the baseline sample and 455 from other health examination survey sample and 269 from civil registry sample (constituting in total 88.8%), against only 174 volunteers (11.2%), with significantly different characteristics and health status. The ORISCAV-LUX2 sample was representative of national population for geographical district, but not for sex and age; the younger (25–34 years) and older (65–79 years) being underrepresented, whereas middle-aged adults being over-represented, with significant sex-specific difference (p < 0.0001).ConclusionThis study represents a careful first-stage analysis of the ORISCAV-LUX2 sample, based on available information on participants and non-participants. The ORISCAV-LUX datasets represents a relevant tool for epidemiological research and a basis for health monitoring and evidence-based prevention of cardiometabolic risk in Luxembourg.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12874-019-0669-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
ObjectivesThis study aimed to assess the prevalence of dementia and cognitive complaints in a cross-sectional sample of Luxembourg seniors, and to discuss the results in the societal context of high cognitive reserve resulting from multilingualism.MethodsA population sample of 1,377 people representative of Luxembourg residents aged over 64 years was initially identified via the national social insurance register. There were three different levels of contribution: full participation in the study, partial participation, and non-participation. We examined the profiles of these three different samples so that we could infer the prevalence estimates in the Luxembourgish senior population as a whole using the prevalence estimates obtained in this study.ResultsAfter careful attention to the potential bias and of the possibility of underestimation, we considered the obtained prevalence estimates of 3.8% for dementia (with corresponding 95% confidence limits (CL) of 2.8% and 4.8%) and 26.1% for cognitive complaints (CL = [17.8–34.3]) as trustworthy.ConclusionBased on these findings, we postulate that high cognitive reserve may result in surprisingly low prevalence estimates of cognitive complaints and dementia in adults over the age of 64 years, which thereby corroborates the longer disability-free life expectancy observed in the Luxembourg population. To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to report such Luxembourgish public health data.
Background Following a first wave in spring and gradual easing of lockdown, Luxembourg experienced an early second epidemic wave of SARS-CoV-2 before the start of summer school holidays on 15th July. This provided the opportunity to investigate the role of school-age children and school settings for transmission. Methods We compared the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 in school-age children, teachers and the general working population in Luxembourg during two epidemic waves: a spring wave from March–April 2020 corresponding to general lockdown with schools being closed and May–July 2020 corresponding to schools being open. We assessed the number of secondary transmissions occurring in schools between May and July 2020 using routine contact tracing data. Results During the first wave in March–April 2020 when schools were closed, the incidence in pupils peaked at 28 per 100,000, while during the second wave in May–July 2020 when schools were open, incidence peaked 100 per 100,000. While incidence of SARS-CoV-2 was higher in adults than in children during the first spring wave, no significant difference was observed during the second wave in early summer. Between May and July 2020, we identified a total of 390 and 34 confirmed COVID-19 cases among 90,150 school-age children and 11,667 teachers, respectively. We further estimate that 179 primary cases caused 49 secondary cases in schools. While some small clusters of mainly student-to-student transmission within the same class were identified, we did not observe any large outbreaks with multiple generations of infection. Conclusions Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 within Luxembourg schools was limited during an early summer epidemic wave in 2020. Precautionary measures including physical distancing as well as easy access to testing, systematic contact tracing appears to have been successful in mitigating transmission within educational settings.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.