Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37483004›Full record

ArticleJournal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD2023

Reliability and Validity of Self-Reported Vascular Risk Factors: Hypertension, Diabetes, and Heart Disease, in a Multi-Ethnic Community Based Study of Aging and Dementia.

Annie J Lee, Didi Sanchez, Dolly Reyes-Dumeyer, Adam M Brickman, Rafael A Lantigua, Badri N Vardarajan, Richard Mayeux

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026
    Article
  5. Cardiovascular risk and hippocampal-cognitive coupling in Alzheimer's disease.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Annie J LeeTaub Institute for Research on Alzheimer's Disease and the Aging Brain, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Didi SanchezTaub Institute for Research on Alzheimer's Disease and the Aging Brain, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Dolly Reyes-DumeyerTaub Institute for Research on Alzheimer's Disease and the Aging Brain, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Adam M BrickmanTaub Institute for Research on Alzheimer's Disease and the Aging Brain, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Rafael A LantiguaTaub Institute for Research on Alzheimer's Disease and the Aging Brain, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Badri N VardarajanTaub Institute for Research on Alzheimer's Disease and the Aging Brain, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Richard MayeuxTaub Institute for Research on Alzheimer's Disease and the Aging Brain, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
NewYork–Presbyterian Hospital · US

Funding

MVP Data Integration into the ADSP Phenotype Harmonization ConsortiumU24AG074855 · NIA · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI CUCCARO, MICHAEL L, HOHMAN, TIMOTHY J · 2021 to 2025
$37.5M
Epidemiological and Genetic Investigations of Blood-Based Biomarkers for Alzheimer's Disease in the Multiethnic, Washington Heights, Inwood, Columbia Aging Project (WHICAP)R01AG072474 · NIA · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI BRICKMAN, ADAM M, MANLY, JENNIFER JAIE · 2021 to 2025
$13.3M
Epidemiological Integration of Genetic Variants and Metabolomics Profiles in Washington Heights Columbia Aging ProjectRF1AG066107 · NIA · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI MAYEUX, RICHARD P, MILLER, GARY W · 2020 to 2022
$11.4M
Epidemiology of Biomarkers of Risk and Progression in LOADR01AG037212 · NIA · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI MAYEUX, RICHARD P, SCHUPF, NICOLE · 2010 to 2015
$10.1M
The 'Career MODE' Program: Careers through Mentoring and training in Omics and Data for Early-stage investigatorsR25GM143298 · NIGMS · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI IONITA, IULIANA, RE, DIANE BERENGERE · 2021 to 2025
$2.3M
NIA NIH HHS R01 AG037212NIA NIH HHS R01 AG072474NIA NIH HHS RF1 AG066107NIA NIH HHS U24 AG074855NIGMS NIH HHS R25 GM143298
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundQueries for the presence of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular risk factors are typically assessed through self-report. However, the reliability and validity of self-reported cardiovascular and cerebrovascular risk factors remain inconsistent in aging research.

objectiveTo determine the reliability and validity of the most frequently self-reported vascular risk factors: hypertension, diabetes, and heart disease.

methods1,870 individuals aged 65 years or older among African Americans, Caribbean Hispanics, and white non-Hispanic individuals were recruited as part of a community study of aging and dementia. We assessed the reliability, validity, sensitivity, specificity, and percent agreement of self-reported hypertension, diabetes, and heart disease, in comparison with direct measures of blood pressure, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), and medication use. The analyses were subsequently stratified by age, sex, education, and ethnic group.

resultsReliability of self-reported hypertension, diabetes, and heart disease was excellent. Agreement between self-reports and clinical measures was moderate for hypertension (kappa: 0.58), good for diabetes (kappa: 0.76-0.79), and moderate for heart disease (kappa: 0.45) differing slightly by age, sex, education, and ethnic group. Sensitivity and specificity for hypertension was 88.6% -78.1%, for diabetes was 87.7% -92.0% (HbA1c ≥6.5%) or 92.7% -92.8% (HbA1c ≥7%), and for heart disease was 85.8% -75.5%. Percent agreement of self-reported was 87.0% for hypertension, 91.6% -92.6% for diabetes, and 77.4% for heart disease.

conclusionAscertainment of self-reported histories of hypertension, diabetes, and heart disease are reliable and valid compared to direct measurements or medication use.

Indexed as

DementiaDiabetes MellitusHeart DiseasesHypertensionAgingGlycated HemoglobinHumansReproducibility of ResultsRisk FactorsSelf ReportGlycated HemoglobinAlzheimer’s diseasediabetesheart diseasehypertensionreliability and validityvascular risk factors

Identifiers

PMID37483004
PMCPMC10578288
OpenAlexW4385067247

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.