ArticlePloS one2024
Identifying individuals at high risk for dementia in primary care: Development and validation of the DemRisk risk prediction model using routinely collected patient data.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Discriminative performance of externally validated dementia risk prediction models: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Alzheimer's disease risk prediction from clinical and social determinants of health: a machine learning cohort study in UK Biobank.BMJ health & care informatics · 2026Article
- Enhancing the validity of CAIDE dementia risk scores with resting heart rate and machine learning: An analysis from the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center across all races/ethnicities.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHealth policy in the UK and globally regarding dementia, emphasises prevention and risk reduction. These goals could be facilitated by automated assessment of dementia risk in primary care using routinely collected patient data. However, existing applicable tools are weak at identifying patients at high risk for dementia. We set out to develop improved risk prediction models deployable in primary care.
methodsElectronic health records (EHRs) for patients aged 60-89 from 393 English general practices were extracted from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) GOLD database. 235 and 158 practices respectively were randomly assigned to development and validation cohorts. Separate dementia risk models were developed for patients aged 60-79 (development cohort n = 616,366; validation cohort n = 419,126) and 80-89 (n = 175,131 and n = 118,717). The outcome was incident dementia within 5 years and more than 60 evidence-based risk factors were evaluated. Risk models were developed and validated using multivariable Cox regression.
resultsThe age 60-79 development cohort included 10,841 incident cases of dementia (6.3 per 1,000 person-years) and the age 80-89 development cohort included 15,994 (40.2 per 1,000 person-years). Discrimination and calibration for the resulting age 60-79 model were good (Harrell's C 0.78 (95% CI: 0.78 to 0.79); Royston's D 1.74 (1.70 to 1.78); calibration slope 0.98 (0.96 to 1.01)), with 37% of patients in the top 1% of risk scores receiving a dementia diagnosis within 5 years. Fit statistics were lower for the age 80-89 model but dementia incidence was higher and 79% of those in the top 1% of risk scores subsequently developed dementia.
conclusionOur models can identify individuals at higher risk of dementia using routinely collected information from their primary care record, and outperform an existing EHR-based tool. Discriminative ability was greatest for those aged 60-79, but the model for those aged 80-89 may also be clinical useful.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.