The Jensen Approach

A clearer basis for decisions about your cognitive health.

Assessment · qEEG brain mapping · interpretation · 90-day strategy

Understand

Cognitive performance and brain activity, viewed together.

Assessment · qEEG brain mapping

BrainMaster qEEG acquisition at Jensen Neurology

qEEG brain mapping

Add a physiologic view.

qEEG shows patterns of electrical brain activity—including areas of relatively increased or decreased activity and differences in distribution.

The map adds information. Interpretation determines what is meaningful.

Quantitative topography

Illustrative visualization · not patient data

Interpret + Strategize

From findings to decisions.

The value is knowing what the findings mean together, what matters most, and what is worth doing next.

01 Priorities

02 Actions

03 Checkpoints

Your 90-Day Brain Health Strategy.

A focused plan built from your findings: what to prioritize now, what actions are most likely to matter, and how to judge progress.

Depending on why you came, the strategy may focus on protecting what is working or improving what is not.

The strategy

The goal is not only clarity. It is improvement where improvement is possible.

The purpose of an evaluation is not simply to explain what is happening. It is to identify what may be modifiable, what may respond to retraining, and where targeted intervention may improve how you feel and function. Practical, non-pharmacologic approaches are prioritized.

Designed around your time

Virtual where it can be. In person where it adds value.

Consultation and review can be virtual. Cognitive assessment and qEEG are completed in New Canaan, with select in-home mapping by arrangement.

Start a Conversation →

One of the most meaningful cognitive concerns I hear is not, “I can’t do this anymore.”

It is:

“I’m getting everything done. It just takes more effort.”

The work is getting done. Decisions are being made. Names eventually come back. Meetings are handled. Travel is managed. Day-to-day life may look largely unchanged.

But the experience of doing those things feels different.

There may be more reliance on lists. More rereading. More difficulty retrieving a word quickly. A longer recovery period after a cognitively demanding day. Less ease moving between tasks. Decisions that once felt automatic may now require more deliberate attention.

I think that change is worth noticing.

The result can look the same. The effort can change.

Most cognitive evaluation is understandably focused on what someone can do: Can you remember the information? Can you complete the task? Can you manage the demands of everyday life?

Those are important questions. But they are not the only questions.

Someone can continue managing complex work and daily responsibilities while noticing that maintaining the same level now requires substantially more concentration, organization or recovery.

People who are accustomed to managing demanding lives are often particularly good at compensating. They develop systems. They prepare more. They reduce distractions. They check their work. They quietly devote more cognitive resources to producing the same result.

From the outside, very little may appear to have changed. From the inside, it can feel quite different.

More effort does not automatically mean disease.

This is where judgment matters.

A change in memory, focus or mental stamina does not by itself establish mild cognitive impairment, Alzheimer’s disease or another neurologic disorder.

Many factors can make thinking feel less efficient. Sleep disruption can affect concentration and memory. Anxiety and mood can alter attention. Medications may interfere with cognition. Thyroid disease, vitamin deficiencies and other medical conditions can contribute. Vascular health, hearing and vision also matter.

At the same time, a new cognitive concern should not automatically be dismissed simply because work and daily life remain intact.

Research on subjective cognitive decline—the experience of noticing a change in thinking despite otherwise preserved function—shows that the relationship between subjective symptoms and measurable cognitive change is variable. In some people the concern remains benign; in others it can precede later objective change.

That is precisely why context matters.

A screening score is one data point.

Brief cognitive screening can be useful. But the more important question is not simply whether someone passes a screening test.

The more useful question is: What changed?

Was the change gradual or sudden? Is it primarily focus, memory, language, processing speed or mental stamina? Does it happen throughout the day or primarily when someone is tired, stressed or multitasking? Has anyone else noticed? Is the change beginning to alter work, relationships or daily routines?

What is happening with sleep, mood, medications and medical health?

And what does the person’s current ability look like relative to their own prior baseline—not simply relative to a population cutoff?

What is worth closer attention.

I pay more attention when a change is new, progressive, consistently noticeable or beginning to alter how someone works or lives.

Word-finding difficulty that occasionally occurs when tired is very different from steadily increasing language difficulty. Forgetting why you walked into a room is different from repeatedly forgetting important conversations. Needing more recovery after an unusually demanding week is different from a sustained loss of mental stamina without an obvious explanation.

Patterns matter. Trajectory matters. The effect on daily life matters.

And sometimes the most useful information is not a single test result, but what changes over time.

Sudden confusion, abrupt language difficulty, weakness, major behavioral change or other acute neurologic symptoms are a different category and warrant prompt medical evaluation.

The goal is not to test everything.

More testing is not automatically better medicine.

The useful question is: What information would actually change the interpretation or the decision?

Sometimes the most important next step is improving sleep, reviewing medications, evaluating a medical contributor or reducing an obvious source of cognitive load. Sometimes formal cognitive testing is appropriate. Sometimes establishing a meaningful baseline and following it over time is more informative than immediately pursuing every available test.

And sometimes an evaluation identifies a pattern that warrants more conventional neurologic investigation.

The purpose is not to prove that every cognitive concern represents disease. It is also not to dismiss a meaningful change simply because someone continues doing everything they need to do.

The purpose is to understand what the change means for that individual.

Daily life may be intact. That does not mean nothing has changed.

For many people, the earliest concern is subtle: “I’m doing everything I’ve always done. It just doesn’t feel as easy anymore.”

That may ultimately prove to be benign, situational or modifiable. But it is a legitimate clinical observation.

And when someone knows their own cognitive baseline well, I think it is worth listening.

Selected references

National Institute on Aging. Memory Problems, Forgetfulness, and Aging: What’s Normal and What’s Not?

National Institute on Aging. Assessing Cognitive Impairment in Older Patients.

Zhou C, et al. Subjective cognitive decline and objective cognitive performance in older adults: a systematic review of longitudinal and cross-sectional studies.

This article is educational and is not intended to diagnose an individual medical condition or replace personal medical evaluation.