METHODS: PsycINFO, Web of Science, and PubMed databases were searched for articles published between January 1998 and December 2018. Fifty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria. All studies implemented the generative retrieval strategy by inducing memories through cue words or pictures, the life-stage method, or open-ended retrieval method. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement guidelines were followed for this review.

RESULTS: Most studies reported that patients with schizophrenia retrieve less specific autobiographical memories when compared to a healthy control group, while only three studies indicated that both groups performed similarly on memory specificity. Patients with schizophrenia also exhibited earlier reminiscence bumps than those for healthy controls. The relationship between comorbid depression and autobiographical memory specificity appeared to be independent because patients' memory specificity improved through intervention, but their level of depression remained unchanged. The U-shaped retrieval pattern for memory specificity was not consistent. Both the connection between the history of attempted suicide and autobiographical memory specificity, and the relationship between psychotic symptoms and autobiographical memory specificity, remain inconclusive. Patients' memory specificity and coherence improved through cognitive training.

METHODS: We harmonised data from 13 longitudinal cohort studies of ageing in North America, South America, Europe, Africa, Asia, and Australia. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they had baseline data for social connection markers and at least two waves of cognitive scores. Follow-up periods ranged from 0 years to 15 years across cohorts. We included participants with cognitive data for at least two waves and social connection data for at least one wave. We then identified and excluded people with dementia at baseline. Primary outcomes were annual rates of change in global cognition and cognitive domain scores over time until final follow-up within each cohort study analysed by use of an individual participant data meta-analysis. Linear mixed models within cohorts used baseline social connection markers as predictors of the primary outcomes. Effects were pooled in two stages using random-effects meta-analyses. We assessed the primary outcomes in the main (partially adjusted) and fully adjusted models. Partially adjusted models controlled for age, sex, and education; fully adjusted models additionally controlled for diabetes, hypertension, smoking, cardiovascular risk, and depression.

FINDINGS: Of the 40 006 participants in the 13 cohort studies, we excluded 1392 people with dementia at baseline. 38 614 individual participants were included in our analyses. For the main models, being in a relationship or married predicted slower global cognitive decline (b=0·010, 95% CI 0·000-0·019) than did being single or never married; living with others predicted slower global cognitive (b=0·007, 0·002-0·012), memory (b=0·017, 0·006-0·028), and language (b=0·008, 0·000-0·015) decline than did living alone; and weekly interactions with family and friends (b=0·016, 0·006-0·026) and weekly community group engagement (b=0·030, 0·007-0·052) predicted slower memory decline than did no interactions and no engagement. Never feeling lonely predicted slower global cognitive (b=0·047, 95% CI 0·018-0·075) and executive function (b=0·047, 0·017-0·077) decline than did often feeling lonely. Degree of social support, having a confidante, and relationship satisfaction did not predict cognitive decline across global cognition or cognitive domains. Heterogeneity was low (I2=0·00-15·11%) for all but two of the significant findings (association between slower memory decline and living with others [I2=58·33%] and community group engagement, I2=37·54-72·19%), suggesting robust results across studies.

INTERPRETATION: Good social connections (ie, living with others, weekly community group engagement, interacting weekly with family and friends, and never feeling lonely) are associated with slower cognitive decline.

METHODS: Male Sprague Dawley rats were subjected to permanent bilateral occlusion of common carotid arteries (PBOCCA) or sham surgery. Then, PBOCCA rats received ip injections with, either vehicle (control group), the muscarinic receptor agonist oxotremorine (0.1 mg/kg), or the acetylcholinesterase inhibitor physostigmine (0.1 mg/kg). Cognitive functions were evaluated using a passive avoidance task and the Morris water maze test. In addition, hippocampal LTP was recorded in vivo under anaesthesia.

RESULTS: The PBOCCA rats exhibited significant deficits in passive avoidance retention and spatial learning and memory tests. They also showed a suppression of LTP formation in the hippocampus. Oxotremorine and physostigmine significantly improved the learning and memory deficits as well as the suppression of LTP in PBOCCA rats.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this study, DET (0.625. 1.25 and 2.5 mg/kg, i.p.) was administered in rats for 21 days and those animals were challenged with single injection of LPS (250 μg/kg, i.p.) for 7 days. Cognitive and behavioral assessment was carried out for 7 days followed by molecular assessment on brain hippocampus. Statistical significance was analyzed with one-way analysis of variance followed by Dunnett's test to compare the treatment groups with the control group.

KEY FINDINGS: DET ameliorated LPS-induced neuroinflammation by suppressing major pro-inflammatory mediators such as iNOS and COX-2. Furthermore, DET enhanced the anti-inflammatory cytokines and concomitantly suppressed the pro-inflammatory cytokines and chemokine production. DET treatment also reversed LPS-induced behavioral and memory deficits and attenuated LPS-induced elevation of the expression of AD markers. DET improved synaptic-functionality via enhancing the activity of pre- and post-synaptic markers, like PSD-95 and SYP. DET also prevented LPS-induced apoptotic neurodegeneration via inhibition of PARP-1, caspase-3 and cleaved caspase-3.

METHODS: The key items were generated by a panel of experts and selected according to content validity ratios. The developed scale was initially applied to 50 patients with AE (development cohort) to evaluate its acceptability, reproducibility, internal consistency, and construct validity. Then, the scale was applied to another independent cohort (validation cohort, n = 38).