Cohort studycited by the Tayebat archiveabstract only checked★ key study A-ORG-14 in-depth review

Ovary removal before menopause and dementia

Increased risk of cognitive impairment or dementia in women who underwent oophorectomy before menopause.

Overview

Rocca WA et al.. Neurology 2007 · PMID 17761551 · DOI 10.1212/01.wnl.0000276984.19542.e6

Women who had ovaries removed before menopause had 46% higher risk of cognitive impairment or dementia later.

Does the study support the specific claim? Yes · Methodological quality: moderate

Original publication

Plain-language summary

Study explained simply
What did the researchers want to find out?

Dementia

How was the study done?

Cohort

How many people, animals or samples were studied?

2961

What was actually found?

Higher risk

How large was the observed effect?

HR 1.46

What do the results mean in everyday life?

Possible brain cost of early ovary removal

What are the study's limitations?

Observational

What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

Supports association

Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

Applicable

What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

Causation

Scientific in-depth review

1. Full reference

Authors
Rocca WA, Bower JH, Maraganore DM, Ahlskog JE, Grossardt BR, de Andrade M, Melton LJ
Journal
Neurology
Year
2007
Identifier
PMID 17761551 DOI 10.1212/01.wnl.0000276984.19542.e6
Verification
verified (PMID in archive was wrong, corrected) – PubMed E-utilities efetch, 2026-10-25
Retracted
no
Corrections
none
Extent checked
abstract only
Conflicts of interest and funding

COI: not stated in record | Grants: NIAMS NIH HHS, NINDS NIH HHS

2. Research question

Premenopausal oophorectomy and cognitive impairment/dementia

3. Study design and population

Study design
Cohort study – Historical cohort (Mayo Clinic Cohort Study of Oophorectomy and Aging)
Population

Olmsted County women, oophorectomy before menopause, non-cancer indication

Country

USA

Period

1950-1987

Sample size

813 unilateral, 676 bilateral, 1472 referents

4. Methods and endpoints

Exposure / intervention

Unilateral or bilateral premenopausal oophorectomy

Comparator

Age-matched referents

Endpoints

Cognitive impairment or dementia (direct/proxy interview)

5. Actual results

Results

HR 1.46 (1.13-1.90) adjusted; risk increased with younger age at oophorectomy (trend P<0.0001); similar regardless of indication and for unilateral/bilateral.

Absolute risks

not reported

Authors' conclusion

Premenopausal oophorectomy associated with increased risk of cognitive impairment or dementia; age-dependent.

6. Strengths

  • Population-based
  • Long follow-up

7. Weaknesses

  • Proxy interviews
  • Observational

8. Risk of bias

Orienting tool
ROBINS-E
Type of assessment
simplified assessment (abstract only)
Full formal assessment
no
Overall risk of bias
some concerns

9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation

10. Relevance to the specific claim

Supports C-ORG-11.

11. Independent contrary findings

12. Transferability to Germany and Europe

Applicable.

13. Overall methodological judgement

Correctly cited.

Multidimensional assessment
Multidimensional assessment
Authenticity of the sourceverified (PMID in archive was wrong, corrected)
Methodological qualitymoderate
Risk of biassome concerns
Precision of resultsmoderate
Directnessdirect
Reproducibilitypartly replicated
Consistency with the overall evidenceconsistent
Regional transferabilitymoderate
Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive)correctly reported

14. Open questions

15. Linked fact checks

Use by the Tayebat archive

Note: according to the archive, the studies were compiled by the archive operators. Whether Dr. Elawady himself cited this study is not established.

What the archive says about the study

Premenopausal oophorectomy raised cognitive impairment or dementia 1.46-fold, risk rising the younger the age at surgery.

A. What was actually studied?

Oophorectomy and dementia

B. What did the authors find?

HR 1.46; age gradient

C. What conclusions do the authors themselves draw?

Associated; age-dependent

D. What does the archive derive from it?

Used to support hormonal-network protection of the brain.

E. Is this derivation scientifically justified?

Correctly reported (association). Archive PMID was wrong (pointed to a Parkinson study); corrected in register.

Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive)
correctly reported