ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2024
Predicting the onset of Alzheimer's disease and related dementia using electronic health records: findings from the cache county study on memory in aging (1995-2008).
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A dynamic risk prediction framework for Alzheimer's disease and related dementias with interpretability.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- A Self-Explainable Dynamic Risk Monitoring Framework for Predicting Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- A bayesian network model for neurocognitive disorders digital screening in Chinese population: development and validation study.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
- Five-year dementia prediction and decision support system based on real-world data.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionClinical notes, biomarkers, and neuroimaging have proven valuable in dementia prediction models. Whether commonly available structured clinical data can predict dementia is an emerging area of research. We aimed to predict gold-standard, research-based diagnoses of dementia including Alzheimer's disease (AD) and/or Alzheimer's disease related dementias (ADRD), in addition to ICD-based AD and/or ADRD diagnoses, in a well-phenotyped, population-based cohort using a machine learning approach.
methodsAdministrative healthcare data (k = 163 diagnostic features), in addition to census/vital record sociodemographic data (k = 6 features), were linked to the Cache County Study (CCS, 1995-2008).
resultsAmong successfully linked UPDB-CCS participants (n = 4206), 522 (12.4%) had incident dementia (AD alone, AD comorbid with ADRD, or ADRD alone) as per the CCS "gold standard" assessments. Random Forest models, with a 1-year prediction window, achieved the best performance with an Area Under the Curve (AUC) of 0.67. Accuracy declined for dementia subtypes: AD/ADRD (AUC = 0.65); ADRD (AUC = 0.49). Accuracy improved when using ICD-based dementia diagnoses (AUC = 0.77). DISCUSSION: Commonly available structured clinical data (without labs, notes, or prescription information) demonstrate modest ability to predict "gold-standard" research-based AD/ADRD diagnoses, corroborated by prior research. Using ICD diagnostic codes to identify dementia as done in the majority of machine learning dementia prediction models, as compared to "gold-standard" dementia diagnoses, can result in higher accuracy, but whether these models are predicting true dementia warrants further research.
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.