Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39031361›Full record

SynthesisJournal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD2024

Attitudes and Preferences Towards Screening for Dementia with a Focus on Ethnic Minority and Low Socio-Economic Groups: A Systematic Review of Research Studies Written in the English Language.

Manjot Brar, Ríona Mc Ardle, Alexander Hagan, Amani Al-Oraibi, Matilda Hanjari, Blossom Stephan, Carol Brayne, Louise Lafortune, Manpreet Bains, Nadeem Qureshi and 1 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Public attitudes toward dementia risk prediction: A mixed-methods study.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Manjot BrarPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Ríona Mc ArdleTranslational and Clinical Research Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Alexander HaganPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Amani Al-OraibiPRISM Research Group, Lifespan and Population Health, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Matilda HanjariPRISM Research Group, Lifespan and Population Health, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Blossom StephanDementia Centre of Excellence, enAble Institute, Curtin University, Bentley, Australia.
Carol BrayneCambridge Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Louise LafortuneCambridge Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Manpreet BainsPRISM Research Group, Lifespan and Population Health, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Nadeem QureshiPRISM Research Group, Lifespan and Population Health, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Louise RobinsonPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Increased understanding of dementia risk-reduction and early detection of Alzheimer's disease and related disorders has spurred interest in the identification of risks for dementia, underlying putative biologies, or dementia itself. Implementation of such approaches require acceptability to the public. Research prior to 2012 indicated limited acceptability for population dementia screening. The changing landscape of dementia prevention research may influence recent perceptions. Additionally, perspectives from underserved populations, such as ethnic minorities and low socio-economic groups, are lacking. Objective: In this systematic review, we sought published studies since 2012 on attitudes and preferences of people with dementia, carers and the general public from ethnic minorities and low socio-economic groups regarding dementia screening. Methods: This review was preregistered on PROSPERO (CRD42023384115) and followed PRISMA guidelines. Key search terms were entered into five databases. Articles were included if they focused on population or risk screening for dementia via primary/community care-based assessments, and which included majority ethnic minority or low socio-economic groups or discretely considered these groups in data analysis. Data were synthesized narratively. Results: Seven studies reported perspectives of ethnic minorities regarding dementia screening; one study included people from low socio-economic groups. Results indicated that participants from ethnic minorities were willing to undergo dementia screening. Predictors of willingness included belief in benefits, desire to boost diversity, and to implement lifestyle changes. Unwillingness was associated with anxiety regarding results. Conclusions: Although there seems to be high acceptability for screening in the studied groups, more research is necessary to explore the practical considerations for screening such as cultural and economic barriers, trust, and post-screening actions.

Indexed as

DementiaEthnicityHumansMass ScreeningMinority GroupsSocioeconomic FactorsAlzheimer’s diseaseattitudesdementiaethnic minoritieslow socioeconomic statuspreferencesscreening

Identifiers

PMID39031361
PMCPMC11380224

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.