ArticleBMC medicine2024
A single risk assessment for the most common diseases of ageing, developed and validated on 10 cohort studies.
Article in BMC medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Characteristics of Cardiovascular Disease Prediction Models Considering Mental Disorders: A Systematic Review.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Pooled it
- A critical review and classification of dementia risk assessment tools to inform dementia risk reduction.The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease · 2025Pooled it
- Equitable Digital Frailty Screening for Marginalized Older Adults Using Audio Computer-Assisted Self-Interview: Collaborative Development Guide and User Testing Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- External validation of dementia risk prediction models in the EPIC-Norfolk cohort: a UK-based cohort study.NPJ dementia · 2026Article
- Development of a midlife-specific CogDrisk algorithm (CogDrisk-ML) to enable validated implementation of dementia risk assessment from midlife to late life.Age and ageing · 2025Article
- Adherence and intensity in multimodal lifestyle-based interventions for cognitive decline prevention: state-of-the-art and future directions.Alzheimer's research & therapy · 2025Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe aimed to develop risk tools for dementia, stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), and diabetes, for adults aged ≥ 65 years using shared risk factors.
methodsData were obtained from 10 population-based cohorts (N = 41,755) with median follow-up time (years) for dementia, stroke, MI, and diabetes of 6.2, 7.0, 6.8, and 7.4, respectively. Disease-free participants at baseline were included, and 22 risk factors (sociodemographic, medical, lifestyle, laboratory biomarkers) were evaluated. Two risk tools (DemNCD and DemNCD-LR based on Fine and Gray sub-distribution and logistic regression [LR], respectively) were developed and validated. Predictive accuracies of these risk tools were assessed using Harrel's C-statistics and area under the curve (AUC) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Model calibration was conducted using Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of fit test along calibration plots.
resultsBoth the DemNCD and DemNCD-LR resulted in similar predictive accuracy for each outcome. The overall AUC (95% CI) for dementia, stroke, MI, and diabetes risk tool were 0·68 (0·65, 0·70), 0·58 (0·54, 0·61), 0·65 (0·61, 0·68), and 0·68 (0·64, 0·72), respectively, for males. For females, these figures were 0·65 (0·63, 0·67), 0·55 (0·52, 0·57), 0·65 (0·62, 0·68), and 0·61 (0·57, 0·65).
conclusionsThe DemNCD is the first tool to predict both dementia and multiple cardio-metabolic diseases using comprehensive risk factors and provided similar predictive accuracy to existing risk tools. It has similar predictive accuracy as tools designed for single outcomes in this age-group. DemNCD has the potential to be used in community and clinical settings as it includes self-reported and routinely available clinical measures.
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.