Cognitive Function, Consent for Participation, and Compliance With Wearable Device Protocols in Older Adults

Cognitive Function, Consent for Participation, and Compliance With Wearable Device Protocols in... Abstract Background Population-based studies of older adults increasingly use wearable devices to measure activity and sleep. Whether cognitive impairment reduces consent and compliance has not been assessed. Methods: In the context of a nationally representative cohort of community-dwelling adults aged 62–90, individuals were invited to participate in a sleep and activity substudy that required wearing a wrist actigraph for 72 consecutive hours. Cognitive function in the parent study was assessed with the survey adaptation of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and individuals were categorized as normal, mild cognitive impairment, or dementia. Participants were asked to press an event marker on the actigraph when they started trying to fall asleep and when they awoke each day. Logistic and negative binomial regressions were used to link cognitive status to nonconsent, returning usable data, wearing the actigraph three full days, ever taking the device off-wrist during the 3-day study period, and pushing the event markers, controlling for demographics. Results Cognitive status was not associated with nonconsent, returning usable data, off-wrist, or missing days. However, individuals classified with dementia were more likely to miss bedtime and wake-up event markers. Individuals classified as mild cognitive impairment were more likely to miss wake-up event markers. Conclusions Impaired cognition does not seem to be a barrier to compliance with simply wearing a device but may affect compliance with additional action such as pressing event markers. Cognition, Epidemiology, Psychosocial, Survey compliance A significant challenge to a more complete understanding of how physical activity and sleep change with, and relate to, aging and illness is the difficulty of obtaining accurate information from surveys about both behaviors (1,2). An increasing number of population-based studies in gerontology have sought to overcome the inaccuracy and potential biases in self-reported behavior by incorporating wearable devices that estimate activity or sleep with motion tracking devices (eg, 3–5). Motion data are captured over several days, stored and downloaded, and used to estimate sleep characteristics, physical activity, or both. Improved measures of activity and sleep from population-based and clinical studies could lead to a more accurate understanding of aging, physical activity, and sleep and the extent to which interventions around these two key restorative behaviors would influence health and well-being (6–9). Motion tracking devices can be worn on different parts of the body; the usual sites are the wrist or the hip (10–13). Although hip placement may be more accurate for monitoring daytime activity, it is not generally considered feasible for measuring sleep, for which wrist devices are the norm. A typical research protocol seeks to measure either sleep or both sleep and physical activity with a wrist actigraph worn continuously over several 24-hour periods, without taking it off, except in some cases to bath, because not all devices are waterproof. There are many different device manufacturers. Several popular models have “event markers,” which are buttons on the device that place a time stamp but do not start or stop recording. To more accurately set the software to assess sleep, protocols ask participants to press the event marker to indicate the beginning and end of their main nighttime rest interval (14,15). Without event markers, sleep intervals are often set just based on activity patterns; this may overscore quiet wakefulness outside the rest interval as sleep (16) and thus produce biased sleep parameters. Hence, respondents’ compliance with an event marker protocol improves the accuracy of both daytime activity and sleep measures from actigraphy (17). However, little research has considered compliance issues for wearable devices such as wrist actigraphs among older adults, which typically require respondents to remember and independently carry out instructions, with respect to the number of days the device is to be worn, keeping it on continuously or, if not, putting it back on if removed, and pressing event markers. One specific factor that may affect compliance with such protocols is cognitive function. Cognitive function declines with age (18). Although minor to moderate cognitive impairment usually does not affect older adults’ competence for independent living, it is associated with memory loss and decreased problem-solving ability (18), all of which suggests the possibility that moderate cognitive impairment or dementia may decrease ability to comply with instructions. Ample evidence indicates that impaired cognitive function is an independent predictor of medication nonadherence (19,20). However, using an objective measure would be particularly valuable for older adults with cognitive impairment because they may not have the memory or the understanding to provide consistent responses to difficult survey questions (21). A number of clinical studies among cognitively impaired patients have used wearable devices to measure sleep or physical activity (eg, 22–27). A systematic review of clinical studies among Alzheimer’s disease patients using actigraphy to measure sleep found that several studies reported problems with patient compliance, either removing the actigraphs at night or removing them repeatedly (22). Without adequate actigraphy data, some participants were omitted from analyses. To our knowledge, no study has investigated compliance with a wrist actigraphy protocol among a population that included a broad range of cognitive function and impairment, to determine whether more impaired individuals are less likely to provide usable or adequate data. The ability to investigate the complex relationships between cognition, sleep, and activity would be enhanced by consistent objective measures. Extant evidence shows that poor sleep predicts cognitive impairment (28) and that increased cognitive impairment is associated with increased sleep disturbance (29). If cognitive impairment is related to lower level of compliance either wearing the actigraph or pressing an event marker that allows more accurate scoring, then studies may inaccurately assess the relationship between cognitive impairment and sleep. In this study, we use a nationally representative community-based study of older adults to compare consent for participation and compliance with an actigraphy protocol by cognitive status. If participants at risk of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia have lower participation and higher noncompliance, future clinical and community-based studies need to determine ways to enhance participation and facilitate compliance. Methods Data The National Social Life, Health and Aging Project (NSHAP) is a nationally representative, population-based, longitudinal study of approximately 3,000 community-dwelling older Americans that began in 2005 and includes in-person interviews in respondents’ homes (30). At the second wave of data collection in 2010, a one-third random sample (n = 1,117) of respondents was invited to participate in an ancillary “Activity and Sleep Study,” which included wearing a wrist actigraph for 72 hours straight (three full days) (1). About 80% of those invited agreed to participate (n = 897). The sleep substudy was not completely integrated into the core data collection, and consenting individuals needed to be recontacted to arrange to send them an actigraph. Not all who had consented were successfully reached in the time window for the substudy, and the final sample size of those returning actigraphs with usable data was 780. The instructions asked participants not to remove the device (and if removed, to put it back on as soon as possible) during the 3 days. In addition, individuals were asked to press an event marker button on the device when they started trying to fall asleep each night and when they woke up each morning. Event markers do not start or stop data collection but just place a timestamp on the activity data. Finally, along with the device, individuals were sent a prepaid mailer to return the device. Measures of Nonconsent and Noncompliance This study focused on six nonconsent and noncompliance measures. The first was declining to participate in the substudy. The second was returning the actigraph without usable data. The third was failing to wear the actigraph for the three full days. The fourth was taking the device off-wrist during the 3-day study period. The fifth and sixth measures of noncompliance were the number of bedtime event markers missed and the number of wake-up time event markers missed. We adjusted the number of missing event markers to the number of days of actigraphy completed. Cognitive Status Cognitive function was assessed by an 18-item survey adaptation of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA-SA) (31). The original MoCA was designed to assess variation in milder levels of cognitive impairment than dementia screeners, and it was designed to be used in the clinical context. The MoCA-SA was developed to be suitable for large population-based surveys administered by trained lay personnel (28). The MoCA-SA assesses six domains: (i) orientation, (ii) executive function, (iii) visuospatial skills, (iv) memory, (v) attention, and (vi) language. The MoCa-SA score can be converted to a full MoCA score (31). The reason to convert to a full MoCA score is to make use of validated cut points for cognitive status; many studies have demonstrated the usefulness of MoCA as a screening tool for dementia and MCI (32,33). We used procedures developed by Kotwal and colleagues (34,35) to convert MoCA-SA score to the full MoCA score. Then, we group individuals into three cognitive status categories: normal (>22 points), MCI (18–22 points), and dementia (<18 points) (31). Statistical Analysis For each measure of noncompliance, we first used chi-square tests to assess whether adherence and cognitive status were independent. Then, to adjust for potential confounders, we employed logistic or negative binomial regression to link cognitive status categories. All regressions controlled for age, gender, race and ethnicity, education, household income, and marital status. Because the purpose of the analysis was to examine cognitive function and survey compliance, we present results from unweighted regressions. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to include weights that accounted for the complex survey design of NSHAP. The results were very similar. Multiple imputation was used to allow the inclusion of individuals with missing data on covariates, such as education (36). Results Table 1 shows prevalence of compliance by cognitive status. The first four compliance measures did not differ significantly by cognitive status. There were significant differences in event marker use by cognitive status. Missing one bedtime or wake-up event marker was the most common category, and relatively few participants missed two or more event markers. For individuals at high risk of dementia, however, 37% missed two or three bedtime event markers and 32% missed two or three wake-up event markers. Comparable percentages were 16 and 11 for the normal cognitive group. Table 1. Percentage of Actigraphy Noncompliance by Cognitive Function Status Normal MCI Dementia Chi-Square Test 1. No consent 20% 18% 22% p = .263  Sample size 614 336 167 2. No usable data returned 12% 14% 14% p = .818  Sample size 492 277 128 3. Three-day actigraphy p = .712  One day missed 1% 2% 1%  Two days missed 6% 5% 6%  Sample size 428 242 110 4. Ever taken device off-wrist 1% 1% 4% p = .152  Sample size 428 242 110 5. Bedtime event markers p = .000  One missed 26% 27% 22%  Two missed 8% 9% 12%  Three missed 8% 11% 25%  Sample size 428 242 110 6. Wake-up event markers p = .000  One missed 21% 19% 25%  Two missed 6% 9% 11%  Three missed 5% 12% 21%  Sample size 428 242 110 Normal MCI Dementia Chi-Square Test 1. No consent 20% 18% 22% p = .263  Sample size 614 336 167 2. No usable data returned 12% 14% 14% p = .818  Sample size 492 277 128 3. Three-day actigraphy p = .712  One day missed 1% 2% 1%  Two days missed 6% 5% 6%  Sample size 428 242 110 4. Ever taken device off-wrist 1% 1% 4% p = .152  Sample size 428 242 110 5. Bedtime event markers p = .000  One missed 26% 27% 22%  Two missed 8% 9% 12%  Three missed 8% 11% 25%  Sample size 428 242 110 6. Wake-up event markers p = .000  One missed 21% 19% 25%  Two missed 6% 9% 11%  Three missed 5% 12% 21%  Sample size 428 242 110 Note: MCI = mild cognitive impairment. Total sample sizes varied by noncompliance measures. View Large Table 1. Percentage of Actigraphy Noncompliance by Cognitive Function Status Normal MCI Dementia Chi-Square Test 1. No consent 20% 18% 22% p = .263  Sample size 614 336 167 2. No usable data returned 12% 14% 14% p = .818  Sample size 492 277 128 3. Three-day actigraphy p = .712  One day missed 1% 2% 1%  Two days missed 6% 5% 6%  Sample size 428 242 110 4. Ever taken device off-wrist 1% 1% 4% p = .152  Sample size 428 242 110 5. Bedtime event markers p = .000  One missed 26% 27% 22%  Two missed 8% 9% 12%  Three missed 8% 11% 25%  Sample size 428 242 110 6. Wake-up event markers p = .000  One missed 21% 19% 25%  Two missed 6% 9% 11%  Three missed 5% 12% 21%  Sample size 428 242 110 Normal MCI Dementia Chi-Square Test 1. No consent 20% 18% 22% p = .263  Sample size 614 336 167 2. No usable data returned 12% 14% 14% p = .818  Sample size 492 277 128 3. Three-day actigraphy p = .712  One day missed 1% 2% 1%  Two days missed 6% 5% 6%  Sample size 428 242 110 4. Ever taken device off-wrist 1% 1% 4% p = .152  Sample size 428 242 110 5. Bedtime event markers p = .000  One missed 26% 27% 22%  Two missed 8% 9% 12%  Three missed 8% 11% 25%  Sample size 428 242 110 6. Wake-up event markers p = .000  One missed 21% 19% 25%  Two missed 6% 9% 11%  Three missed 5% 12% 21%  Sample size 428 242 110 Note: MCI = mild cognitive impairment. Total sample sizes varied by noncompliance measures. View Large Table 2 presents results from logistic and negative binomial regression models that link cognitive status to measures of nonconsent and noncompliance, accounting for demographic characteristics. Results showed that cognition was not associated with consent, return of usable data, off-wrist, or with the number of days completed. Older adults categorized as MCI and dementia were similarly likely to complete 3 days of actigraphy compared with older adults who were without MCI or dementia. However, cognitive status was significantly associated with pushing the event markers. Individuals with dementia had a higher proportion of missing bedtime event markers and wake-up event markers. Individuals categorized as MCI had a higher proportion of missing wake-up event markers. Table 2. Predictors of Actigraphy Compliance in the National Social Life, Health, and Aging Project, Results From Logistic and Negative Binomial Regressions (Unweighted) No Consent No Usable Data Returned Number of Days Missed Ever Off-wrist Number of Bedtime Markers Missed Number of Wake-up Markers Missed Odds Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Cognitive status (ref. = normal)  MCI 0.77 (0.53, 1.13) 0.86 (0.53, 1.39) 0.94 (0.44, 1.00) 0.67 (0.13, 3.40) 1.33 (0.95, 1.86) 1.57 (1.07, 2.28)*  Dementia 0.98 (0.63, 1.54) 0.85 (0.45 1.59) 1.17 (0.41 3.31) 2.07 (0.46, 9.36) 1.51 (1.03, 2.21)* 1.89 (1.27, 2.80)**  Sample size 1,117 897 780 780 780 780 No Consent No Usable Data Returned Number of Days Missed Ever Off-wrist Number of Bedtime Markers Missed Number of Wake-up Markers Missed Odds Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Cognitive status (ref. = normal)  MCI 0.77 (0.53, 1.13) 0.86 (0.53, 1.39) 0.94 (0.44, 1.00) 0.67 (0.13, 3.40) 1.33 (0.95, 1.86) 1.57 (1.07, 2.28)*  Dementia 0.98 (0.63, 1.54) 0.85 (0.45 1.59) 1.17 (0.41 3.31) 2.07 (0.46, 9.36) 1.51 (1.03, 2.21)* 1.89 (1.27, 2.80)**  Sample size 1,117 897 780 780 780 780 Note: CI = confidence interval; MCI= mild cognitive impairment. Results for “no consent”, “no usable data returned”, and “ever off-wrist” were based on logistic regressions and results for the remaining noncompliance measures were based on negative binomial regressions. All regressions controlled for age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, household income, and marital status. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001. View Large Table 2. Predictors of Actigraphy Compliance in the National Social Life, Health, and Aging Project, Results From Logistic and Negative Binomial Regressions (Unweighted) No Consent No Usable Data Returned Number of Days Missed Ever Off-wrist Number of Bedtime Markers Missed Number of Wake-up Markers Missed Odds Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Cognitive status (ref. = normal)  MCI 0.77 (0.53, 1.13) 0.86 (0.53, 1.39) 0.94 (0.44, 1.00) 0.67 (0.13, 3.40) 1.33 (0.95, 1.86) 1.57 (1.07, 2.28)*  Dementia 0.98 (0.63, 1.54) 0.85 (0.45 1.59) 1.17 (0.41 3.31) 2.07 (0.46, 9.36) 1.51 (1.03, 2.21)* 1.89 (1.27, 2.80)**  Sample size 1,117 897 780 780 780 780 No Consent No Usable Data Returned Number of Days Missed Ever Off-wrist Number of Bedtime Markers Missed Number of Wake-up Markers Missed Odds Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Cognitive status (ref. = normal)  MCI 0.77 (0.53, 1.13) 0.86 (0.53, 1.39) 0.94 (0.44, 1.00) 0.67 (0.13, 3.40) 1.33 (0.95, 1.86) 1.57 (1.07, 2.28)*  Dementia 0.98 (0.63, 1.54) 0.85 (0.45 1.59) 1.17 (0.41 3.31) 2.07 (0.46, 9.36) 1.51 (1.03, 2.21)* 1.89 (1.27, 2.80)**  Sample size 1,117 897 780 780 780 780 Note: CI = confidence interval; MCI= mild cognitive impairment. Results for “no consent”, “no usable data returned”, and “ever off-wrist” were based on logistic regressions and results for the remaining noncompliance measures were based on negative binomial regressions. All regressions controlled for age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, household income, and marital status. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001. View Large We carried out additional analyses with the separate cognitive domains (Table 3). Results suggested that orientation was the domain associated with returning devices with usable data. Memory and attention were the domains associated with higher chances of missing wake-up event markers. Table 3. Results From Logistic and Negative Binomial Regressions Linking Actigraphy Compliance on Each Domain of Cognitive Function (Unweighted) No Consent No Usable Data Returned Number of Days Missed Ever Off-wrist Number of Bedtime Markers Missed Number of Wake-up Markers Missed Odds Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Orientation 1.15 (0.67, 1.98) 0.51 (0.28, 0.96)* 0.37 (0.12, 1.13) 0.71 (0.08, 6.00) 0.73 (0.54, 0.99)* 1.05 (0.68, 1.60) Executive function 0.96 (0.75, 1.22) 0.84 (0.61, 1.14) 1.53 (0.98, 2.39) 1.64 (0.67, 4.09) 1.01 (0.86, 1.18) 0.91 (0.71, 1.17) Visuospatial skills 0.98 (0.78, 1.23) 0.92 (0.69, 1.24) 0.82 (0.45, 1.49) 0.75 (0.33, 1.72) 0.84 (0.73, 0.98)* 0.91 (0.73, 1.13) Memory 0.95 (0.85, 1.05) 0.94 (0.82, 1.09) 0.95 (0.78, 1.17) 1.12 (0.75, 1.69) 0.96 (0.89, 1.02) 0.91 (0.85, 0.97)** Attention 1.04 (0.93, 1.16) 1.06 (0.92, 1.68) 0.90 (0.72, 1.13) 1.01 (0.67, 1.52) 0.98 (0.89, 1.04) 0.91 (0.84, 0.98)* Language 0.88 (0.71, 1.10) 1.25 (0.93, 1.68) 0.95 (0.62, 1.44) 0.87 (0.39, 1.97) 1.01 (0.88, 1.15) 0.94 (0.80, 1.10) Sample size 1,117 897 780 780 780 780 No Consent No Usable Data Returned Number of Days Missed Ever Off-wrist Number of Bedtime Markers Missed Number of Wake-up Markers Missed Odds Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Orientation 1.15 (0.67, 1.98) 0.51 (0.28, 0.96)* 0.37 (0.12, 1.13) 0.71 (0.08, 6.00) 0.73 (0.54, 0.99)* 1.05 (0.68, 1.60) Executive function 0.96 (0.75, 1.22) 0.84 (0.61, 1.14) 1.53 (0.98, 2.39) 1.64 (0.67, 4.09) 1.01 (0.86, 1.18) 0.91 (0.71, 1.17) Visuospatial skills 0.98 (0.78, 1.23) 0.92 (0.69, 1.24) 0.82 (0.45, 1.49) 0.75 (0.33, 1.72) 0.84 (0.73, 0.98)* 0.91 (0.73, 1.13) Memory 0.95 (0.85, 1.05) 0.94 (0.82, 1.09) 0.95 (0.78, 1.17) 1.12 (0.75, 1.69) 0.96 (0.89, 1.02) 0.91 (0.85, 0.97)** Attention 1.04 (0.93, 1.16) 1.06 (0.92, 1.68) 0.90 (0.72, 1.13) 1.01 (0.67, 1.52) 0.98 (0.89, 1.04) 0.91 (0.84, 0.98)* Language 0.88 (0.71, 1.10) 1.25 (0.93, 1.68) 0.95 (0.62, 1.44) 0.87 (0.39, 1.97) 1.01 (0.88, 1.15) 0.94 (0.80, 1.10) Sample size 1,117 897 780 780 780 780 Note: CI = confidence interval. All regression controlled for age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, household income, and marital status. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001. View Large Table 3. Results From Logistic and Negative Binomial Regressions Linking Actigraphy Compliance on Each Domain of Cognitive Function (Unweighted) No Consent No Usable Data Returned Number of Days Missed Ever Off-wrist Number of Bedtime Markers Missed Number of Wake-up Markers Missed Odds Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Orientation 1.15 (0.67, 1.98) 0.51 (0.28, 0.96)* 0.37 (0.12, 1.13) 0.71 (0.08, 6.00) 0.73 (0.54, 0.99)* 1.05 (0.68, 1.60) Executive function 0.96 (0.75, 1.22) 0.84 (0.61, 1.14) 1.53 (0.98, 2.39) 1.64 (0.67, 4.09) 1.01 (0.86, 1.18) 0.91 (0.71, 1.17) Visuospatial skills 0.98 (0.78, 1.23) 0.92 (0.69, 1.24) 0.82 (0.45, 1.49) 0.75 (0.33, 1.72) 0.84 (0.73, 0.98)* 0.91 (0.73, 1.13) Memory 0.95 (0.85, 1.05) 0.94 (0.82, 1.09) 0.95 (0.78, 1.17) 1.12 (0.75, 1.69) 0.96 (0.89, 1.02) 0.91 (0.85, 0.97)** Attention 1.04 (0.93, 1.16) 1.06 (0.92, 1.68) 0.90 (0.72, 1.13) 1.01 (0.67, 1.52) 0.98 (0.89, 1.04) 0.91 (0.84, 0.98)* Language 0.88 (0.71, 1.10) 1.25 (0.93, 1.68) 0.95 (0.62, 1.44) 0.87 (0.39, 1.97) 1.01 (0.88, 1.15) 0.94 (0.80, 1.10) Sample size 1,117 897 780 780 780 780 No Consent No Usable Data Returned Number of Days Missed Ever Off-wrist Number of Bedtime Markers Missed Number of Wake-up Markers Missed Odds Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Orientation 1.15 (0.67, 1.98) 0.51 (0.28, 0.96)* 0.37 (0.12, 1.13) 0.71 (0.08, 6.00) 0.73 (0.54, 0.99)* 1.05 (0.68, 1.60) Executive function 0.96 (0.75, 1.22) 0.84 (0.61, 1.14) 1.53 (0.98, 2.39) 1.64 (0.67, 4.09) 1.01 (0.86, 1.18) 0.91 (0.71, 1.17) Visuospatial skills 0.98 (0.78, 1.23) 0.92 (0.69, 1.24) 0.82 (0.45, 1.49) 0.75 (0.33, 1.72) 0.84 (0.73, 0.98)* 0.91 (0.73, 1.13) Memory 0.95 (0.85, 1.05) 0.94 (0.82, 1.09) 0.95 (0.78, 1.17) 1.12 (0.75, 1.69) 0.96 (0.89, 1.02) 0.91 (0.85, 0.97)** Attention 1.04 (0.93, 1.16) 1.06 (0.92, 1.68) 0.90 (0.72, 1.13) 1.01 (0.67, 1.52) 0.98 (0.89, 1.04) 0.91 (0.84, 0.98)* Language 0.88 (0.71, 1.10) 1.25 (0.93, 1.68) 0.95 (0.62, 1.44) 0.87 (0.39, 1.97) 1.01 (0.88, 1.15) 0.94 (0.80, 1.10) Sample size 1,117 897 780 780 780 780 Note: CI = confidence interval. All regression controlled for age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, household income, and marital status. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001. View Large Discussion Many studies have assessed the validity of actigraphy for estimating sleep and physical activity characteristics, but few have assessed adherence to actigraphy protocols, and none to our knowledge has examined whether cognitive status is a barrier to collecting data with actigraphs. In the context of a nationally representative cohort of older adults, we found that cognitive status, as defined by a multidomain survey assessment, the MOCA-SA, was not associated with consent for participation and compliance with key aspects of wrist actigraphy protocol: wearing the device the requested number of days without taking it off and returning the device with usable data. However, individuals with impaired cognitive status and dementia were more likely to fail to push event markers, which they had been instructed to do when they started trying to fall asleep each night and when they woke up each morning. Taken together, these findings suggest that cognitive status is not a barrier to incorporating wearable devices into study protocols. However, our results also suggest that more complicated instructions may be a bigger problem for those with MCI or dementia compared with those with normal cognitive status. These findings have implications for epidemiologic studies of older adults that use wearable devices to measure sleep or activity. Dementia often accompanies changes in gait and in sleep patterns (29,37,38). Wearable device potentially provides more accurate measures of activity and sleep and would provide better data about these associations. The role of activity and sleep as potential risk factors for chronic diseases has been a topic of great interest in the clinical and epidemiologic literatures (39–42). Results from our analyses suggest that actigraphy is equally acceptable and useful among older adults with dementia or MCI, compared with those with normal cognitive status. However, developing simple protocols for wearable devices would avoid a potential bias with impaired cognitive function being linked to less accurate data. This study has some limitations, however. First, results were associational instead of causal due to the cross-sectional nature of the data. Second, the sleep protocol was only 3 days in NSHAP, whereas many studies with wrist actigraphy have longer protocols of 4–10 consecutive days. Other differences in compliance with cognitive status might emerge in longer protocols, such as wearing the device the requested number of days. In the past decade, new technologies have created opportunities for collecting objective data on the health and functioning of older adults, as well as other populations. Our results suggest that variation in cognitive status among older adults is not a barrier to using wearable devices in studies with older adults with cognitive impairment; however, protocols that do not call on participants to do more than just wear the device should yield more complete and consistent data in this population. Funding This work was supported by a grant from the NIH (grant number R01AG051175). Conflict of Interest None reported. References 1. Lauderdale DS , Philip Schumm L , Kurina LM et al. Assessment of sleep in the National Social Life, Health, and Aging Project . J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci . 2014 ; 69 ( suppl 2 ): S125 – S133 . doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbu092 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 2. Troiano RP , Berrigan D , Dodd KW , Mâsse LC , Tilert T , McDowell M . Physical activity in the United States measured by accelerometer . Med Sci Sports Exerc . 2008 ; 40 : 181 – 188 . doi: 10.1249/mss.0b013e31815a51b3 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 3. Chen JH , Waite L , Kurina LM , Thisted RA , McClintock M , Lauderdale DS . Insomnia symptoms and actigraph-estimated sleep characteristics in a nationally representative sample of older adults . J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci . 2015 ; 70 : 185 – 192 . doi: 10.1093/gerona/glu144 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 4. Leng Y , Stone K , Ancoli-Israel S , Covinsky K , Yaffe K . Who take naps? Self-reported and objectively measured napping in very old women . J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci . 2018 ; 73 : 374 – 379 . doi:10.1093/gerona/glx014 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 5. Spira AP , Beaudreau SA , Stone KL et al. ; Osteoporotic Fractures in Men Study . Reliability and validity of the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index and the Epworth Sleepiness Scale in older men . J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci . 2012 ; 67 : 433 – 439 . doi: 10.1093/gerona/glr172 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 6. Elhakeem A , Hannam K , Deere KC et al. Physical activity producing low, but not medium or higher, vertical impacts is inversely related to BMI in older adults: findings from a multi cohort study . J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci . 2017 . doi:10.1093/gerona/glx176 7. Huisingh-Scheetz M , Wroblewski K , Kocherginsky M et al. The relationship between physical activity and frailty among US older adults based on hourly accelerometry data . J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci . 2017 . doi:10.1093/gerona/glx208 8. Spira AP . Sleep and health in older adulthood: recent advances and the path forward . J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci . 2018 ; 73 : 357 – 359 . doi:10.1093/gerona/glx263 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 9. Zeitzer JM , Blackwell T , Hoffman AR , Cummings S , Ancoli-Israel S , Stone K ; Osteoporotic Fractures in Men (MrOS) Study Research Group . Daily patterns of accelerometer activity predict changes in sleep, cognition, and mortality in older men . J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci . 2017 . doi:10.1093/gerona/glw250 10. Hargens TA , Deyarmin KN , Snyder KM , Mihalik AG , Sharpe LE . Comparison of wrist-worn and hip-worn activity monitors under free living conditions . J Med Eng Technol . 2017 ; 41 : 200 – 207 . doi: 10.1080/03091902.2016.1271046 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 11. Kamada M , Shiroma EJ , Harris TB , Lee IM . Comparison of physical activity assessed using hip- and wrist-worn accelerometers . Gait Posture . 2016 ; 44 : 23 – 28 . doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2015.11.005 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 12. Loprinzi PD , Smith B . Comparison between wrist-worn and waist-worn accelerometry . J Phys Act Health . 2017 ; 14 : 539 – 545 . doi: 10.1123/jpah.2016-0211 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 13. Zinkhan M , Berger K , Hense S et al. Agreement of different methods for assessing sleep characteristics: a comparison of two actigraphs, wrist and hip placement, and self-report with polysomnography . Sleep Med . 2014 ; 15 : 1107 – 1114 . doi: 10.1016/j.sleep.2014.04.015 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 14. Dowling GA , Mastick J , Colling E , Carter JH , Singer CM , Aminoff MJ . Melatonin for sleep disturbances in Parkinson’s disease . Sleep Med . 2005 ; 6 : 459 – 466 . doi: 10.1016/j.sleep.2005.04.004 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 15. van den Berg JF , Knvistingh Neven A , Tulen JH et al. Actigraphic sleep duration and fragmentation are related to obesity in the elderly: the Rotterdam Study . Int J Obes (Lond) . 2008 ; 32 : 1083 – 1090 . doi: 10.1038/ijo.2008.57 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 16. Patel SR , Weng J , Rueschman M et al. Reproducibility of a standardized actigraphy scoring algorithm for sleep in a US Hispanic/Latino population . Sleep . 2015 ; 38 : 1497 – 1503 . doi: 10.5665/sleep.4998 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 17. de Souza L , Benedito-Silva AA , Pires ML , Poyares D , Tufik S , Calil HM . Further validation of actigraphy for sleep studies . Sleep . 2003 ; 26 : 81 – 85 . doi:10.1093/sleep/26.1.81 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 18. Salthouse T . Consequences of age-related cognitive declines . Annu Rev Psychol . 2012 ; 63 : 201 – 226 . doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100328 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 19. Alosco ML , Spitznagel MB , van Dulmen M et al. Cognitive function and treatment adherence in older adults with heart failure . Psychosom Med . 2012 ; 74 : 965 – 973 . doi: 10.1097/PSY.0b013e318272ef2a Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 20. Campbell NL , Boustani MA , Skopelja EN , Gao S , Unverzagt FW , Murray MD . Medication adherence in older adults with cognitive impairment: a systematic evidence-based review . Am J Geriatr Pharmacother . 2012 ; 10 : 165 – 177 . doi: 10.1016/j.amjopharm.2012.04.004 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 21. Cigolle CT , Nagel CL , Blaum CS , Liang J , Quinones AR . Inconsistency in the self-report of chronic diseases in panel surveys: developing an adjudication method for the Health and Retirement Study . J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci . 2016 . doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbw063 22. Camargos EF , Louzada FM , Nóbrega OT . Wrist actigraphy for measuring sleep in intervention studies with Alzheimer’s disease patients: application, usefulness, and challenges . Sleep Med Rev . 2013 ; 17 : 475 – 488 . doi: 10.1016/j.smrv.2013.01.006 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 23. Cavuoto MG , Ong B , Pike KE , Nicholas CL , Bei B , Kinsella GJ . Better objective sleep quality in older adults with high subjective memory decline . J Alzheimers Dis . 2016 ; 53 : 943 – 953 . doi: 10.3233/JAD-160187 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 24. Del Din S , Galna B , Godfrey A et al. Analysis of free-living gait in older adults with and without Parkinson’s disease and with and without a history of falls: identifying generic and disease specific characteristics . J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci . 2017 . doi: 10.1093/gerona/glx254 25. Leger D , Elbaz M , Dubois A et al. Alzheimer’s disease severity is not significantly associated with short sleep: survey by actigraphy on 208 mild and moderate Alzheimer’s disease patients . J Alzheimers Dis . 2017 ; 55 : 321 – 331 . doi: 10.3233/JAD-160754 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 26. Mc Carthy M , Muehlhausen W , Schüler P . The case for using actigraphy generated sleep and activity endpoints in Alzheimer’s disease clinical trials . J Prev Alzheimers Dis . 2016 ; 3 : 173 – 176 . doi: 10.14283/jpad.2016.98 Google Scholar PubMed 27. Varma VR , Chuang YF , Harris GC , Tan EJ , Carlson MC . Low-intensity daily walking activity is associated with hippocampal volume in older adults . Hippocampus . 2015 ; 25 : 605 – 615 . doi: 10.1002/hipo.22397 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 28. Blackwell T , Yaffe K , Ancoli-Israel S et al. ; Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Group . Poor sleep is associated with impaired cognitive function in older women: the study of osteoporotic fractures . J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci . 2006 ; 61 : 405 – 410 . doi:10.1093/gerona/61.4.405 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 29. Bliwise DL , Hughes M , McMahon PM , Kutner N . Observed sleep/wakefulness and severity of dementia in an Alzheimer’s disease special care unit . J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci . 1995 ; 50 : M303 – M306 . doi:10.1093/gerona/50A.6.M303 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 30. O’Muircheartaigh C , English N , Pedlow S , Kwok PK . Sample design, sample augmentation, and estimation for Wave 2 of the NSHAP . J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci . 2014 ; 69 ( suppl 2 ): S15 – S26 . doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbu053 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 31. Shega JW , Sunkara PD , Kotwal A et al. Measuring cognition: the Chicago Cognitive Function Measure in the National Social Life, Health and Aging Project, Wave 2 . J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci . 2014 ; 69 ( suppl 2 ): S166 – S176 . doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbu106 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 32. Nasreddine ZS , Phillips NA , Bédirian V et al. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment . J Am Geriatr Soc . 2005 ; 53 : 695 – 699 . doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53221.x Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 33. Roalf DR , Moberg PJ , Xie SX , Wolk DA , Moelter ST , Arnold SE . Comparative accuracies of two common screening instruments for classification of Alzheimer’s disease, mild cognitive impairment, and healthy aging . Alzheimers Dement . 2013 ; 9 : 529 – 537 . doi: 10.1016/j.jalz.2012.10.001 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 34. Kotwal AA , Schumm P , Kern DW et al. Evaluation of a brief survey instrument for assessing subtle differences in cognitive function among older adults . Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord . 2015 ; 29 : 317 – 324 . doi: 10.1097/WAD.0000000000000068 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 35. Kotwal AA , Kim J , Waite L , Dale W . Social function and cognitive status: results from a US nationally representative survey of older adults . J Gen Intern Med . 2016 ; 31 : 854 – 862 . doi: 10.1007/s11606-016-3696-0 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 36. Hawkley LC , Kocherginsky M , Wong J , Kim J , Cagney KA . Missing data in Wave 2 of NSHAP: prevalence, predictors, and recommended treatment . J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci . 2014 ; 69 ( suppl 2 ): S38 – S50 . doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbu044 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 37. Callisaya ML , Blizzard CL , Wood AG , Thrift AG , Wardill T , Srikanth VK . Longitudinal relationships between cognitive decline and gait slowing: the Tasmanian Study of Cognition and Gait . J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci . 2015 ; 70 : 1226 – 1232 . doi: 10.1093/gerona/glv066 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 38. Ijmker T , Lamoth CJ . Gait and cognition: the relationship between gait stability and variability with executive function in persons with and without dementia . Gait Posture . 2012 ; 35 : 126 – 130 . doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2011.08.022 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 39. Buxton OM , Marcelli E . Short and long sleep are positively associated with obesity, diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease among adults in the United States . Soc Sci Med . 2010 ; 71 : 1027 – 1036 . doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.05.041 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 40. Cappuccio FP , D’Elia L , Strazzullo P , Miller MA . Quantity and quality of sleep and incidence of type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis . Diabetes Care . 2010 ; 33 : 414 – 420 . doi: 10.2337/dc09-1124 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 41. Cappuccio FP , Cooper D , D’Elia L , Strazzullo P , Miller MA . Sleep duration predicts cardiovascular outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies . Eur Heart J . 2011 ; 32 : 1484 – 1492 . doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehr007 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 42. Healy GN , Matthews CE , Dunstan DW , Winkler EA , Owen N . Sedentary time and cardio-metabolic biomarkers in US adults: NHANES 2003-06 . Eur Heart J . 2011 ; 32 : 590 – 597 . doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehq451 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed © The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Gerontological Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biomedical Sciences and Medical Sciences Oxford University Press

Cognitive Function, Consent for Participation, and Compliance With Wearable Device Protocols in Older Adults

Loading next page...
 
/lp/ou_press/cognitive-function-consent-for-participation-and-compliance-with-OTCAvIe5ku
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Gerontological Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
ISSN
1079-5006
eISSN
1758-535X
D.O.I.
10.1093/gerona/gly032
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Abstract Background Population-based studies of older adults increasingly use wearable devices to measure activity and sleep. Whether cognitive impairment reduces consent and compliance has not been assessed. Methods: In the context of a nationally representative cohort of community-dwelling adults aged 62–90, individuals were invited to participate in a sleep and activity substudy that required wearing a wrist actigraph for 72 consecutive hours. Cognitive function in the parent study was assessed with the survey adaptation of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and individuals were categorized as normal, mild cognitive impairment, or dementia. Participants were asked to press an event marker on the actigraph when they started trying to fall asleep and when they awoke each day. Logistic and negative binomial regressions were used to link cognitive status to nonconsent, returning usable data, wearing the actigraph three full days, ever taking the device off-wrist during the 3-day study period, and pushing the event markers, controlling for demographics. Results Cognitive status was not associated with nonconsent, returning usable data, off-wrist, or missing days. However, individuals classified with dementia were more likely to miss bedtime and wake-up event markers. Individuals classified as mild cognitive impairment were more likely to miss wake-up event markers. Conclusions Impaired cognition does not seem to be a barrier to compliance with simply wearing a device but may affect compliance with additional action such as pressing event markers. Cognition, Epidemiology, Psychosocial, Survey compliance A significant challenge to a more complete understanding of how physical activity and sleep change with, and relate to, aging and illness is the difficulty of obtaining accurate information from surveys about both behaviors (1,2). An increasing number of population-based studies in gerontology have sought to overcome the inaccuracy and potential biases in self-reported behavior by incorporating wearable devices that estimate activity or sleep with motion tracking devices (eg, 3–5). Motion data are captured over several days, stored and downloaded, and used to estimate sleep characteristics, physical activity, or both. Improved measures of activity and sleep from population-based and clinical studies could lead to a more accurate understanding of aging, physical activity, and sleep and the extent to which interventions around these two key restorative behaviors would influence health and well-being (6–9). Motion tracking devices can be worn on different parts of the body; the usual sites are the wrist or the hip (10–13). Although hip placement may be more accurate for monitoring daytime activity, it is not generally considered feasible for measuring sleep, for which wrist devices are the norm. A typical research protocol seeks to measure either sleep or both sleep and physical activity with a wrist actigraph worn continuously over several 24-hour periods, without taking it off, except in some cases to bath, because not all devices are waterproof. There are many different device manufacturers. Several popular models have “event markers,” which are buttons on the device that place a time stamp but do not start or stop recording. To more accurately set the software to assess sleep, protocols ask participants to press the event marker to indicate the beginning and end of their main nighttime rest interval (14,15). Without event markers, sleep intervals are often set just based on activity patterns; this may overscore quiet wakefulness outside the rest interval as sleep (16) and thus produce biased sleep parameters. Hence, respondents’ compliance with an event marker protocol improves the accuracy of both daytime activity and sleep measures from actigraphy (17). However, little research has considered compliance issues for wearable devices such as wrist actigraphs among older adults, which typically require respondents to remember and independently carry out instructions, with respect to the number of days the device is to be worn, keeping it on continuously or, if not, putting it back on if removed, and pressing event markers. One specific factor that may affect compliance with such protocols is cognitive function. Cognitive function declines with age (18). Although minor to moderate cognitive impairment usually does not affect older adults’ competence for independent living, it is associated with memory loss and decreased problem-solving ability (18), all of which suggests the possibility that moderate cognitive impairment or dementia may decrease ability to comply with instructions. Ample evidence indicates that impaired cognitive function is an independent predictor of medication nonadherence (19,20). However, using an objective measure would be particularly valuable for older adults with cognitive impairment because they may not have the memory or the understanding to provide consistent responses to difficult survey questions (21). A number of clinical studies among cognitively impaired patients have used wearable devices to measure sleep or physical activity (eg, 22–27). A systematic review of clinical studies among Alzheimer’s disease patients using actigraphy to measure sleep found that several studies reported problems with patient compliance, either removing the actigraphs at night or removing them repeatedly (22). Without adequate actigraphy data, some participants were omitted from analyses. To our knowledge, no study has investigated compliance with a wrist actigraphy protocol among a population that included a broad range of cognitive function and impairment, to determine whether more impaired individuals are less likely to provide usable or adequate data. The ability to investigate the complex relationships between cognition, sleep, and activity would be enhanced by consistent objective measures. Extant evidence shows that poor sleep predicts cognitive impairment (28) and that increased cognitive impairment is associated with increased sleep disturbance (29). If cognitive impairment is related to lower level of compliance either wearing the actigraph or pressing an event marker that allows more accurate scoring, then studies may inaccurately assess the relationship between cognitive impairment and sleep. In this study, we use a nationally representative community-based study of older adults to compare consent for participation and compliance with an actigraphy protocol by cognitive status. If participants at risk of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia have lower participation and higher noncompliance, future clinical and community-based studies need to determine ways to enhance participation and facilitate compliance. Methods Data The National Social Life, Health and Aging Project (NSHAP) is a nationally representative, population-based, longitudinal study of approximately 3,000 community-dwelling older Americans that began in 2005 and includes in-person interviews in respondents’ homes (30). At the second wave of data collection in 2010, a one-third random sample (n = 1,117) of respondents was invited to participate in an ancillary “Activity and Sleep Study,” which included wearing a wrist actigraph for 72 hours straight (three full days) (1). About 80% of those invited agreed to participate (n = 897). The sleep substudy was not completely integrated into the core data collection, and consenting individuals needed to be recontacted to arrange to send them an actigraph. Not all who had consented were successfully reached in the time window for the substudy, and the final sample size of those returning actigraphs with usable data was 780. The instructions asked participants not to remove the device (and if removed, to put it back on as soon as possible) during the 3 days. In addition, individuals were asked to press an event marker button on the device when they started trying to fall asleep each night and when they woke up each morning. Event markers do not start or stop data collection but just place a timestamp on the activity data. Finally, along with the device, individuals were sent a prepaid mailer to return the device. Measures of Nonconsent and Noncompliance This study focused on six nonconsent and noncompliance measures. The first was declining to participate in the substudy. The second was returning the actigraph without usable data. The third was failing to wear the actigraph for the three full days. The fourth was taking the device off-wrist during the 3-day study period. The fifth and sixth measures of noncompliance were the number of bedtime event markers missed and the number of wake-up time event markers missed. We adjusted the number of missing event markers to the number of days of actigraphy completed. Cognitive Status Cognitive function was assessed by an 18-item survey adaptation of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA-SA) (31). The original MoCA was designed to assess variation in milder levels of cognitive impairment than dementia screeners, and it was designed to be used in the clinical context. The MoCA-SA was developed to be suitable for large population-based surveys administered by trained lay personnel (28). The MoCA-SA assesses six domains: (i) orientation, (ii) executive function, (iii) visuospatial skills, (iv) memory, (v) attention, and (vi) language. The MoCa-SA score can be converted to a full MoCA score (31). The reason to convert to a full MoCA score is to make use of validated cut points for cognitive status; many studies have demonstrated the usefulness of MoCA as a screening tool for dementia and MCI (32,33). We used procedures developed by Kotwal and colleagues (34,35) to convert MoCA-SA score to the full MoCA score. Then, we group individuals into three cognitive status categories: normal (>22 points), MCI (18–22 points), and dementia (<18 points) (31). Statistical Analysis For each measure of noncompliance, we first used chi-square tests to assess whether adherence and cognitive status were independent. Then, to adjust for potential confounders, we employed logistic or negative binomial regression to link cognitive status categories. All regressions controlled for age, gender, race and ethnicity, education, household income, and marital status. Because the purpose of the analysis was to examine cognitive function and survey compliance, we present results from unweighted regressions. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to include weights that accounted for the complex survey design of NSHAP. The results were very similar. Multiple imputation was used to allow the inclusion of individuals with missing data on covariates, such as education (36). Results Table 1 shows prevalence of compliance by cognitive status. The first four compliance measures did not differ significantly by cognitive status. There were significant differences in event marker use by cognitive status. Missing one bedtime or wake-up event marker was the most common category, and relatively few participants missed two or more event markers. For individuals at high risk of dementia, however, 37% missed two or three bedtime event markers and 32% missed two or three wake-up event markers. Comparable percentages were 16 and 11 for the normal cognitive group. Table 1. Percentage of Actigraphy Noncompliance by Cognitive Function Status Normal MCI Dementia Chi-Square Test 1. No consent 20% 18% 22% p = .263  Sample size 614 336 167 2. No usable data returned 12% 14% 14% p = .818  Sample size 492 277 128 3. Three-day actigraphy p = .712  One day missed 1% 2% 1%  Two days missed 6% 5% 6%  Sample size 428 242 110 4. Ever taken device off-wrist 1% 1% 4% p = .152  Sample size 428 242 110 5. Bedtime event markers p = .000  One missed 26% 27% 22%  Two missed 8% 9% 12%  Three missed 8% 11% 25%  Sample size 428 242 110 6. Wake-up event markers p = .000  One missed 21% 19% 25%  Two missed 6% 9% 11%  Three missed 5% 12% 21%  Sample size 428 242 110 Normal MCI Dementia Chi-Square Test 1. No consent 20% 18% 22% p = .263  Sample size 614 336 167 2. No usable data returned 12% 14% 14% p = .818  Sample size 492 277 128 3. Three-day actigraphy p = .712  One day missed 1% 2% 1%  Two days missed 6% 5% 6%  Sample size 428 242 110 4. Ever taken device off-wrist 1% 1% 4% p = .152  Sample size 428 242 110 5. Bedtime event markers p = .000  One missed 26% 27% 22%  Two missed 8% 9% 12%  Three missed 8% 11% 25%  Sample size 428 242 110 6. Wake-up event markers p = .000  One missed 21% 19% 25%  Two missed 6% 9% 11%  Three missed 5% 12% 21%  Sample size 428 242 110 Note: MCI = mild cognitive impairment. Total sample sizes varied by noncompliance measures. View Large Table 1. Percentage of Actigraphy Noncompliance by Cognitive Function Status Normal MCI Dementia Chi-Square Test 1. No consent 20% 18% 22% p = .263  Sample size 614 336 167 2. No usable data returned 12% 14% 14% p = .818  Sample size 492 277 128 3. Three-day actigraphy p = .712  One day missed 1% 2% 1%  Two days missed 6% 5% 6%  Sample size 428 242 110 4. Ever taken device off-wrist 1% 1% 4% p = .152  Sample size 428 242 110 5. Bedtime event markers p = .000  One missed 26% 27% 22%  Two missed 8% 9% 12%  Three missed 8% 11% 25%  Sample size 428 242 110 6. Wake-up event markers p = .000  One missed 21% 19% 25%  Two missed 6% 9% 11%  Three missed 5% 12% 21%  Sample size 428 242 110 Normal MCI Dementia Chi-Square Test 1. No consent 20% 18% 22% p = .263  Sample size 614 336 167 2. No usable data returned 12% 14% 14% p = .818  Sample size 492 277 128 3. Three-day actigraphy p = .712  One day missed 1% 2% 1%  Two days missed 6% 5% 6%  Sample size 428 242 110 4. Ever taken device off-wrist 1% 1% 4% p = .152  Sample size 428 242 110 5. Bedtime event markers p = .000  One missed 26% 27% 22%  Two missed 8% 9% 12%  Three missed 8% 11% 25%  Sample size 428 242 110 6. Wake-up event markers p = .000  One missed 21% 19% 25%  Two missed 6% 9% 11%  Three missed 5% 12% 21%  Sample size 428 242 110 Note: MCI = mild cognitive impairment. Total sample sizes varied by noncompliance measures. View Large Table 2 presents results from logistic and negative binomial regression models that link cognitive status to measures of nonconsent and noncompliance, accounting for demographic characteristics. Results showed that cognition was not associated with consent, return of usable data, off-wrist, or with the number of days completed. Older adults categorized as MCI and dementia were similarly likely to complete 3 days of actigraphy compared with older adults who were without MCI or dementia. However, cognitive status was significantly associated with pushing the event markers. Individuals with dementia had a higher proportion of missing bedtime event markers and wake-up event markers. Individuals categorized as MCI had a higher proportion of missing wake-up event markers. Table 2. Predictors of Actigraphy Compliance in the National Social Life, Health, and Aging Project, Results From Logistic and Negative Binomial Regressions (Unweighted) No Consent No Usable Data Returned Number of Days Missed Ever Off-wrist Number of Bedtime Markers Missed Number of Wake-up Markers Missed Odds Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Cognitive status (ref. = normal)  MCI 0.77 (0.53, 1.13) 0.86 (0.53, 1.39) 0.94 (0.44, 1.00) 0.67 (0.13, 3.40) 1.33 (0.95, 1.86) 1.57 (1.07, 2.28)*  Dementia 0.98 (0.63, 1.54) 0.85 (0.45 1.59) 1.17 (0.41 3.31) 2.07 (0.46, 9.36) 1.51 (1.03, 2.21)* 1.89 (1.27, 2.80)**  Sample size 1,117 897 780 780 780 780 No Consent No Usable Data Returned Number of Days Missed Ever Off-wrist Number of Bedtime Markers Missed Number of Wake-up Markers Missed Odds Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Cognitive status (ref. = normal)  MCI 0.77 (0.53, 1.13) 0.86 (0.53, 1.39) 0.94 (0.44, 1.00) 0.67 (0.13, 3.40) 1.33 (0.95, 1.86) 1.57 (1.07, 2.28)*  Dementia 0.98 (0.63, 1.54) 0.85 (0.45 1.59) 1.17 (0.41 3.31) 2.07 (0.46, 9.36) 1.51 (1.03, 2.21)* 1.89 (1.27, 2.80)**  Sample size 1,117 897 780 780 780 780 Note: CI = confidence interval; MCI= mild cognitive impairment. Results for “no consent”, “no usable data returned”, and “ever off-wrist” were based on logistic regressions and results for the remaining noncompliance measures were based on negative binomial regressions. All regressions controlled for age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, household income, and marital status. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001. View Large Table 2. Predictors of Actigraphy Compliance in the National Social Life, Health, and Aging Project, Results From Logistic and Negative Binomial Regressions (Unweighted) No Consent No Usable Data Returned Number of Days Missed Ever Off-wrist Number of Bedtime Markers Missed Number of Wake-up Markers Missed Odds Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Cognitive status (ref. = normal)  MCI 0.77 (0.53, 1.13) 0.86 (0.53, 1.39) 0.94 (0.44, 1.00) 0.67 (0.13, 3.40) 1.33 (0.95, 1.86) 1.57 (1.07, 2.28)*  Dementia 0.98 (0.63, 1.54) 0.85 (0.45 1.59) 1.17 (0.41 3.31) 2.07 (0.46, 9.36) 1.51 (1.03, 2.21)* 1.89 (1.27, 2.80)**  Sample size 1,117 897 780 780 780 780 No Consent No Usable Data Returned Number of Days Missed Ever Off-wrist Number of Bedtime Markers Missed Number of Wake-up Markers Missed Odds Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Cognitive status (ref. = normal)  MCI 0.77 (0.53, 1.13) 0.86 (0.53, 1.39) 0.94 (0.44, 1.00) 0.67 (0.13, 3.40) 1.33 (0.95, 1.86) 1.57 (1.07, 2.28)*  Dementia 0.98 (0.63, 1.54) 0.85 (0.45 1.59) 1.17 (0.41 3.31) 2.07 (0.46, 9.36) 1.51 (1.03, 2.21)* 1.89 (1.27, 2.80)**  Sample size 1,117 897 780 780 780 780 Note: CI = confidence interval; MCI= mild cognitive impairment. Results for “no consent”, “no usable data returned”, and “ever off-wrist” were based on logistic regressions and results for the remaining noncompliance measures were based on negative binomial regressions. All regressions controlled for age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, household income, and marital status. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001. View Large We carried out additional analyses with the separate cognitive domains (Table 3). Results suggested that orientation was the domain associated with returning devices with usable data. Memory and attention were the domains associated with higher chances of missing wake-up event markers. Table 3. Results From Logistic and Negative Binomial Regressions Linking Actigraphy Compliance on Each Domain of Cognitive Function (Unweighted) No Consent No Usable Data Returned Number of Days Missed Ever Off-wrist Number of Bedtime Markers Missed Number of Wake-up Markers Missed Odds Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Orientation 1.15 (0.67, 1.98) 0.51 (0.28, 0.96)* 0.37 (0.12, 1.13) 0.71 (0.08, 6.00) 0.73 (0.54, 0.99)* 1.05 (0.68, 1.60) Executive function 0.96 (0.75, 1.22) 0.84 (0.61, 1.14) 1.53 (0.98, 2.39) 1.64 (0.67, 4.09) 1.01 (0.86, 1.18) 0.91 (0.71, 1.17) Visuospatial skills 0.98 (0.78, 1.23) 0.92 (0.69, 1.24) 0.82 (0.45, 1.49) 0.75 (0.33, 1.72) 0.84 (0.73, 0.98)* 0.91 (0.73, 1.13) Memory 0.95 (0.85, 1.05) 0.94 (0.82, 1.09) 0.95 (0.78, 1.17) 1.12 (0.75, 1.69) 0.96 (0.89, 1.02) 0.91 (0.85, 0.97)** Attention 1.04 (0.93, 1.16) 1.06 (0.92, 1.68) 0.90 (0.72, 1.13) 1.01 (0.67, 1.52) 0.98 (0.89, 1.04) 0.91 (0.84, 0.98)* Language 0.88 (0.71, 1.10) 1.25 (0.93, 1.68) 0.95 (0.62, 1.44) 0.87 (0.39, 1.97) 1.01 (0.88, 1.15) 0.94 (0.80, 1.10) Sample size 1,117 897 780 780 780 780 No Consent No Usable Data Returned Number of Days Missed Ever Off-wrist Number of Bedtime Markers Missed Number of Wake-up Markers Missed Odds Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Orientation 1.15 (0.67, 1.98) 0.51 (0.28, 0.96)* 0.37 (0.12, 1.13) 0.71 (0.08, 6.00) 0.73 (0.54, 0.99)* 1.05 (0.68, 1.60) Executive function 0.96 (0.75, 1.22) 0.84 (0.61, 1.14) 1.53 (0.98, 2.39) 1.64 (0.67, 4.09) 1.01 (0.86, 1.18) 0.91 (0.71, 1.17) Visuospatial skills 0.98 (0.78, 1.23) 0.92 (0.69, 1.24) 0.82 (0.45, 1.49) 0.75 (0.33, 1.72) 0.84 (0.73, 0.98)* 0.91 (0.73, 1.13) Memory 0.95 (0.85, 1.05) 0.94 (0.82, 1.09) 0.95 (0.78, 1.17) 1.12 (0.75, 1.69) 0.96 (0.89, 1.02) 0.91 (0.85, 0.97)** Attention 1.04 (0.93, 1.16) 1.06 (0.92, 1.68) 0.90 (0.72, 1.13) 1.01 (0.67, 1.52) 0.98 (0.89, 1.04) 0.91 (0.84, 0.98)* Language 0.88 (0.71, 1.10) 1.25 (0.93, 1.68) 0.95 (0.62, 1.44) 0.87 (0.39, 1.97) 1.01 (0.88, 1.15) 0.94 (0.80, 1.10) Sample size 1,117 897 780 780 780 780 Note: CI = confidence interval. All regression controlled for age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, household income, and marital status. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001. View Large Table 3. Results From Logistic and Negative Binomial Regressions Linking Actigraphy Compliance on Each Domain of Cognitive Function (Unweighted) No Consent No Usable Data Returned Number of Days Missed Ever Off-wrist Number of Bedtime Markers Missed Number of Wake-up Markers Missed Odds Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Orientation 1.15 (0.67, 1.98) 0.51 (0.28, 0.96)* 0.37 (0.12, 1.13) 0.71 (0.08, 6.00) 0.73 (0.54, 0.99)* 1.05 (0.68, 1.60) Executive function 0.96 (0.75, 1.22) 0.84 (0.61, 1.14) 1.53 (0.98, 2.39) 1.64 (0.67, 4.09) 1.01 (0.86, 1.18) 0.91 (0.71, 1.17) Visuospatial skills 0.98 (0.78, 1.23) 0.92 (0.69, 1.24) 0.82 (0.45, 1.49) 0.75 (0.33, 1.72) 0.84 (0.73, 0.98)* 0.91 (0.73, 1.13) Memory 0.95 (0.85, 1.05) 0.94 (0.82, 1.09) 0.95 (0.78, 1.17) 1.12 (0.75, 1.69) 0.96 (0.89, 1.02) 0.91 (0.85, 0.97)** Attention 1.04 (0.93, 1.16) 1.06 (0.92, 1.68) 0.90 (0.72, 1.13) 1.01 (0.67, 1.52) 0.98 (0.89, 1.04) 0.91 (0.84, 0.98)* Language 0.88 (0.71, 1.10) 1.25 (0.93, 1.68) 0.95 (0.62, 1.44) 0.87 (0.39, 1.97) 1.01 (0.88, 1.15) 0.94 (0.80, 1.10) Sample size 1,117 897 780 780 780 780 No Consent No Usable Data Returned Number of Days Missed Ever Off-wrist Number of Bedtime Markers Missed Number of Wake-up Markers Missed Odds Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Odds Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Incident Rate Ratio (95% CI) Orientation 1.15 (0.67, 1.98) 0.51 (0.28, 0.96)* 0.37 (0.12, 1.13) 0.71 (0.08, 6.00) 0.73 (0.54, 0.99)* 1.05 (0.68, 1.60) Executive function 0.96 (0.75, 1.22) 0.84 (0.61, 1.14) 1.53 (0.98, 2.39) 1.64 (0.67, 4.09) 1.01 (0.86, 1.18) 0.91 (0.71, 1.17) Visuospatial skills 0.98 (0.78, 1.23) 0.92 (0.69, 1.24) 0.82 (0.45, 1.49) 0.75 (0.33, 1.72) 0.84 (0.73, 0.98)* 0.91 (0.73, 1.13) Memory 0.95 (0.85, 1.05) 0.94 (0.82, 1.09) 0.95 (0.78, 1.17) 1.12 (0.75, 1.69) 0.96 (0.89, 1.02) 0.91 (0.85, 0.97)** Attention 1.04 (0.93, 1.16) 1.06 (0.92, 1.68) 0.90 (0.72, 1.13) 1.01 (0.67, 1.52) 0.98 (0.89, 1.04) 0.91 (0.84, 0.98)* Language 0.88 (0.71, 1.10) 1.25 (0.93, 1.68) 0.95 (0.62, 1.44) 0.87 (0.39, 1.97) 1.01 (0.88, 1.15) 0.94 (0.80, 1.10) Sample size 1,117 897 780 780 780 780 Note: CI = confidence interval. All regression controlled for age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, household income, and marital status. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001. View Large Discussion Many studies have assessed the validity of actigraphy for estimating sleep and physical activity characteristics, but few have assessed adherence to actigraphy protocols, and none to our knowledge has examined whether cognitive status is a barrier to collecting data with actigraphs. In the context of a nationally representative cohort of older adults, we found that cognitive status, as defined by a multidomain survey assessment, the MOCA-SA, was not associated with consent for participation and compliance with key aspects of wrist actigraphy protocol: wearing the device the requested number of days without taking it off and returning the device with usable data. However, individuals with impaired cognitive status and dementia were more likely to fail to push event markers, which they had been instructed to do when they started trying to fall asleep each night and when they woke up each morning. Taken together, these findings suggest that cognitive status is not a barrier to incorporating wearable devices into study protocols. However, our results also suggest that more complicated instructions may be a bigger problem for those with MCI or dementia compared with those with normal cognitive status. These findings have implications for epidemiologic studies of older adults that use wearable devices to measure sleep or activity. Dementia often accompanies changes in gait and in sleep patterns (29,37,38). Wearable device potentially provides more accurate measures of activity and sleep and would provide better data about these associations. The role of activity and sleep as potential risk factors for chronic diseases has been a topic of great interest in the clinical and epidemiologic literatures (39–42). Results from our analyses suggest that actigraphy is equally acceptable and useful among older adults with dementia or MCI, compared with those with normal cognitive status. However, developing simple protocols for wearable devices would avoid a potential bias with impaired cognitive function being linked to less accurate data. This study has some limitations, however. First, results were associational instead of causal due to the cross-sectional nature of the data. Second, the sleep protocol was only 3 days in NSHAP, whereas many studies with wrist actigraphy have longer protocols of 4–10 consecutive days. Other differences in compliance with cognitive status might emerge in longer protocols, such as wearing the device the requested number of days. In the past decade, new technologies have created opportunities for collecting objective data on the health and functioning of older adults, as well as other populations. Our results suggest that variation in cognitive status among older adults is not a barrier to using wearable devices in studies with older adults with cognitive impairment; however, protocols that do not call on participants to do more than just wear the device should yield more complete and consistent data in this population. Funding This work was supported by a grant from the NIH (grant number R01AG051175). Conflict of Interest None reported. References 1. Lauderdale DS , Philip Schumm L , Kurina LM et al. Assessment of sleep in the National Social Life, Health, and Aging Project . J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci . 2014 ; 69 ( suppl 2 ): S125 – S133 . doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbu092 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 2. Troiano RP , Berrigan D , Dodd KW , Mâsse LC , Tilert T , McDowell M . Physical activity in the United States measured by accelerometer . Med Sci Sports Exerc . 2008 ; 40 : 181 – 188 . doi: 10.1249/mss.0b013e31815a51b3 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 3. Chen JH , Waite L , Kurina LM , Thisted RA , McClintock M , Lauderdale DS . Insomnia symptoms and actigraph-estimated sleep characteristics in a nationally representative sample of older adults . J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci . 2015 ; 70 : 185 – 192 . doi: 10.1093/gerona/glu144 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 4. Leng Y , Stone K , Ancoli-Israel S , Covinsky K , Yaffe K . Who take naps? Self-reported and objectively measured napping in very old women . J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci . 2018 ; 73 : 374 – 379 . doi:10.1093/gerona/glx014 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 5. Spira AP , Beaudreau SA , Stone KL et al. ; Osteoporotic Fractures in Men Study . Reliability and validity of the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index and the Epworth Sleepiness Scale in older men . J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci . 2012 ; 67 : 433 – 439 . doi: 10.1093/gerona/glr172 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 6. Elhakeem A , Hannam K , Deere KC et al. Physical activity producing low, but not medium or higher, vertical impacts is inversely related to BMI in older adults: findings from a multi cohort study . J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci . 2017 . doi:10.1093/gerona/glx176 7. Huisingh-Scheetz M , Wroblewski K , Kocherginsky M et al. The relationship between physical activity and frailty among US older adults based on hourly accelerometry data . J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci . 2017 . doi:10.1093/gerona/glx208 8. Spira AP . Sleep and health in older adulthood: recent advances and the path forward . J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci . 2018 ; 73 : 357 – 359 . doi:10.1093/gerona/glx263 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 9. Zeitzer JM , Blackwell T , Hoffman AR , Cummings S , Ancoli-Israel S , Stone K ; Osteoporotic Fractures in Men (MrOS) Study Research Group . Daily patterns of accelerometer activity predict changes in sleep, cognition, and mortality in older men . J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci . 2017 . doi:10.1093/gerona/glw250 10. Hargens TA , Deyarmin KN , Snyder KM , Mihalik AG , Sharpe LE . Comparison of wrist-worn and hip-worn activity monitors under free living conditions . J Med Eng Technol . 2017 ; 41 : 200 – 207 . doi: 10.1080/03091902.2016.1271046 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 11. Kamada M , Shiroma EJ , Harris TB , Lee IM . Comparison of physical activity assessed using hip- and wrist-worn accelerometers . Gait Posture . 2016 ; 44 : 23 – 28 . doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2015.11.005 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 12. Loprinzi PD , Smith B . Comparison between wrist-worn and waist-worn accelerometry . J Phys Act Health . 2017 ; 14 : 539 – 545 . doi: 10.1123/jpah.2016-0211 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 13. Zinkhan M , Berger K , Hense S et al. Agreement of different methods for assessing sleep characteristics: a comparison of two actigraphs, wrist and hip placement, and self-report with polysomnography . Sleep Med . 2014 ; 15 : 1107 – 1114 . doi: 10.1016/j.sleep.2014.04.015 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 14. Dowling GA , Mastick J , Colling E , Carter JH , Singer CM , Aminoff MJ . Melatonin for sleep disturbances in Parkinson’s disease . Sleep Med . 2005 ; 6 : 459 – 466 . doi: 10.1016/j.sleep.2005.04.004 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 15. van den Berg JF , Knvistingh Neven A , Tulen JH et al. Actigraphic sleep duration and fragmentation are related to obesity in the elderly: the Rotterdam Study . Int J Obes (Lond) . 2008 ; 32 : 1083 – 1090 . doi: 10.1038/ijo.2008.57 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 16. Patel SR , Weng J , Rueschman M et al. Reproducibility of a standardized actigraphy scoring algorithm for sleep in a US Hispanic/Latino population . Sleep . 2015 ; 38 : 1497 – 1503 . doi: 10.5665/sleep.4998 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 17. de Souza L , Benedito-Silva AA , Pires ML , Poyares D , Tufik S , Calil HM . Further validation of actigraphy for sleep studies . Sleep . 2003 ; 26 : 81 – 85 . doi:10.1093/sleep/26.1.81 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 18. Salthouse T . Consequences of age-related cognitive declines . Annu Rev Psychol . 2012 ; 63 : 201 – 226 . doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100328 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 19. Alosco ML , Spitznagel MB , van Dulmen M et al. Cognitive function and treatment adherence in older adults with heart failure . Psychosom Med . 2012 ; 74 : 965 – 973 . doi: 10.1097/PSY.0b013e318272ef2a Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 20. Campbell NL , Boustani MA , Skopelja EN , Gao S , Unverzagt FW , Murray MD . Medication adherence in older adults with cognitive impairment: a systematic evidence-based review . Am J Geriatr Pharmacother . 2012 ; 10 : 165 – 177 . doi: 10.1016/j.amjopharm.2012.04.004 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 21. Cigolle CT , Nagel CL , Blaum CS , Liang J , Quinones AR . Inconsistency in the self-report of chronic diseases in panel surveys: developing an adjudication method for the Health and Retirement Study . J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci . 2016 . doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbw063 22. Camargos EF , Louzada FM , Nóbrega OT . Wrist actigraphy for measuring sleep in intervention studies with Alzheimer’s disease patients: application, usefulness, and challenges . Sleep Med Rev . 2013 ; 17 : 475 – 488 . doi: 10.1016/j.smrv.2013.01.006 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 23. Cavuoto MG , Ong B , Pike KE , Nicholas CL , Bei B , Kinsella GJ . Better objective sleep quality in older adults with high subjective memory decline . J Alzheimers Dis . 2016 ; 53 : 943 – 953 . doi: 10.3233/JAD-160187 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 24. Del Din S , Galna B , Godfrey A et al. Analysis of free-living gait in older adults with and without Parkinson’s disease and with and without a history of falls: identifying generic and disease specific characteristics . J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci . 2017 . doi: 10.1093/gerona/glx254 25. Leger D , Elbaz M , Dubois A et al. Alzheimer’s disease severity is not significantly associated with short sleep: survey by actigraphy on 208 mild and moderate Alzheimer’s disease patients . J Alzheimers Dis . 2017 ; 55 : 321 – 331 . doi: 10.3233/JAD-160754 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 26. Mc Carthy M , Muehlhausen W , Schüler P . The case for using actigraphy generated sleep and activity endpoints in Alzheimer’s disease clinical trials . J Prev Alzheimers Dis . 2016 ; 3 : 173 – 176 . doi: 10.14283/jpad.2016.98 Google Scholar PubMed 27. Varma VR , Chuang YF , Harris GC , Tan EJ , Carlson MC . Low-intensity daily walking activity is associated with hippocampal volume in older adults . Hippocampus . 2015 ; 25 : 605 – 615 . doi: 10.1002/hipo.22397 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 28. Blackwell T , Yaffe K , Ancoli-Israel S et al. ; Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Group . Poor sleep is associated with impaired cognitive function in older women: the study of osteoporotic fractures . J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci . 2006 ; 61 : 405 – 410 . doi:10.1093/gerona/61.4.405 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 29. Bliwise DL , Hughes M , McMahon PM , Kutner N . Observed sleep/wakefulness and severity of dementia in an Alzheimer’s disease special care unit . J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci . 1995 ; 50 : M303 – M306 . doi:10.1093/gerona/50A.6.M303 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 30. O’Muircheartaigh C , English N , Pedlow S , Kwok PK . Sample design, sample augmentation, and estimation for Wave 2 of the NSHAP . J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci . 2014 ; 69 ( suppl 2 ): S15 – S26 . doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbu053 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 31. Shega JW , Sunkara PD , Kotwal A et al. Measuring cognition: the Chicago Cognitive Function Measure in the National Social Life, Health and Aging Project, Wave 2 . J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci . 2014 ; 69 ( suppl 2 ): S166 – S176 . doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbu106 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 32. Nasreddine ZS , Phillips NA , Bédirian V et al. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment . J Am Geriatr Soc . 2005 ; 53 : 695 – 699 . doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53221.x Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 33. Roalf DR , Moberg PJ , Xie SX , Wolk DA , Moelter ST , Arnold SE . Comparative accuracies of two common screening instruments for classification of Alzheimer’s disease, mild cognitive impairment, and healthy aging . Alzheimers Dement . 2013 ; 9 : 529 – 537 . doi: 10.1016/j.jalz.2012.10.001 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 34. Kotwal AA , Schumm P , Kern DW et al. Evaluation of a brief survey instrument for assessing subtle differences in cognitive function among older adults . Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord . 2015 ; 29 : 317 – 324 . doi: 10.1097/WAD.0000000000000068 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 35. Kotwal AA , Kim J , Waite L , Dale W . Social function and cognitive status: results from a US nationally representative survey of older adults . J Gen Intern Med . 2016 ; 31 : 854 – 862 . doi: 10.1007/s11606-016-3696-0 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 36. Hawkley LC , Kocherginsky M , Wong J , Kim J , Cagney KA . Missing data in Wave 2 of NSHAP: prevalence, predictors, and recommended treatment . J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci . 2014 ; 69 ( suppl 2 ): S38 – S50 . doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbu044 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 37. Callisaya ML , Blizzard CL , Wood AG , Thrift AG , Wardill T , Srikanth VK . Longitudinal relationships between cognitive decline and gait slowing: the Tasmanian Study of Cognition and Gait . J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci . 2015 ; 70 : 1226 – 1232 . doi: 10.1093/gerona/glv066 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 38. Ijmker T , Lamoth CJ . Gait and cognition: the relationship between gait stability and variability with executive function in persons with and without dementia . Gait Posture . 2012 ; 35 : 126 – 130 . doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2011.08.022 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 39. Buxton OM , Marcelli E . Short and long sleep are positively associated with obesity, diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease among adults in the United States . Soc Sci Med . 2010 ; 71 : 1027 – 1036 . doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.05.041 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 40. Cappuccio FP , D’Elia L , Strazzullo P , Miller MA . Quantity and quality of sleep and incidence of type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis . Diabetes Care . 2010 ; 33 : 414 – 420 . doi: 10.2337/dc09-1124 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 41. Cappuccio FP , Cooper D , D’Elia L , Strazzullo P , Miller MA . Sleep duration predicts cardiovascular outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies . Eur Heart J . 2011 ; 32 : 1484 – 1492 . doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehr007 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed 42. Healy GN , Matthews CE , Dunstan DW , Winkler EA , Owen N . Sedentary time and cardio-metabolic biomarkers in US adults: NHANES 2003-06 . Eur Heart J . 2011 ; 32 : 590 – 597 . doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehq451 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed © The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Gerontological Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Journal

The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biomedical Sciences and Medical SciencesOxford University Press

Published: Mar 20, 2018

There are no references for this article.

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off