Blossom C M Stephan1, Eugene Tang, Graciela Muniz-Terrera. 1. aNewcastle University Institute for Ageing and Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK bCentre for Dementia Prevention, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: A key priority in dementia research is the development of tools to identify individuals at high risk of dementia. This is important to prevent or delay dementia onset and as we move towards personalized medicine. RECENT FINDINGS: Numerous models (n > 50) for predicting dementia have been developed. These vary in the number (0 to 20+) and type (e.g. demographics, health, neuropsychological, and genetic) of predictor variables used for risk calculation, follow-up length (1-20 years) and age at screening (mid vs laterlife). Evaluation of the models shows that most have moderate-to-poor predictive accuracy. Few have been externally validated, raising questions about their generalizability outside the cohorts from which they were developed. The results highlight that if additional models are proposed the field will be overwhelmed with many competing risk models, making it difficult to reach consensus on which is best. SUMMARY: Numerous models for predicting dementia have been proposed but are limited by a lack of external validation and evaluation of economic impact. Innovative methods and data designs may be needed to improve derivation of dementia risk scores. Having a method for predicting dementia risk could transform medical research and allow for earlier testing of intervention strategies.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: A key priority in dementia research is the development of tools to identify individuals at high risk of dementia. This is important to prevent or delay dementia onset and as we move towards personalized medicine. RECENT FINDINGS: Numerous models (n > 50) for predicting dementia have been developed. These vary in the number (0 to 20+) and type (e.g. demographics, health, neuropsychological, and genetic) of predictor variables used for risk calculation, follow-up length (1-20 years) and age at screening (mid vs laterlife). Evaluation of the models shows that most have moderate-to-poor predictive accuracy. Few have been externally validated, raising questions about their generalizability outside the cohorts from which they were developed. The results highlight that if additional models are proposed the field will be overwhelmed with many competing risk models, making it difficult to reach consensus on which is best. SUMMARY: Numerous models for predicting dementia have been proposed but are limited by a lack of external validation and evaluation of economic impact. Innovative methods and data designs may be needed to improve derivation of dementia risk scores. Having a method for predicting dementia risk could transform medical research and allow for earlier testing of intervention strategies.
Authors: Elizabeth Ford; Nicholas Greenslade; Priya Paudyal; Stephen Bremner; Helen E Smith; Sube Banerjee; Shanu Sadhwani; Philip Rooney; Seb Oliver; Jackie Cassell Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-03-29 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Yuriko Nakaoku; Yoshimitsu Takahashi; Shinjiro Tominari; Takeo Nakayama Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-01-13 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Eero Vuoksimaa; Juha O Rinne; Noora Lindgren; Kauko Heikkilä; Markku Koskenvuo; Jaakko Kaprio Journal: Alzheimers Dement (Amst) Date: 2016-09-14
Authors: Silvan Licher; Pınar Yilmaz; Maarten J G Leening; Frank J Wolters; Meike W Vernooij; Blossom C M Stephan; M Kamran Ikram; M Arfan Ikram Journal: Eur J Epidemiol Date: 2018-05-08 Impact factor: 8.082
Authors: Elizabeth Ford; Philip Rooney; Seb Oliver; Richard Hoile; Peter Hurley; Sube Banerjee; Harm van Marwijk; Jackie Cassell Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2019-12-02 Impact factor: 2.796
Authors: Blossom C M Stephan; Eduwin Pakpahan; Mario Siervo; Silvan Licher; Graciela Muniz-Terrera; Devi Mohan; Daisy Acosta; Guillermina Rodriguez Pichardo; Ana Luisa Sosa; Isaac Acosta; Juan J Llibre-Rodriguez; Martin Prince; Louise Robinson; Matthew Prina Journal: Lancet Glob Health Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 38.927