ArticleJAMA network open2025
Detection Bias in EHR-Based Research on Clinical Exposures and Dementia.
Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association of cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic syndrome with blinding eye diseases: insights from a UK Biobank cohort analysis.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
- Comment on: "Association between modifiable lifestyle factors and the incidences of sudden sensorineural hearing loss and Meniere's disease: a population-based nested case-control study".European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026Article
- Otological conditions and autism spectrum disorder in Medicaid beneficiaries aged 1 to 20 years: a cross-sectional study.BMC pediatrics · 2026Article
- Association and risk prediction of 19 complex diseases with polygenic scores and socioeconomic status.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- Exploratory associations between co-occurring opioid and alcohol use disorders and GIP/GLP-1 receptor agonist treatment.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- Fibromyalgia and Risk of Alzheimer's DiseaseRelated Dementia: A Nationwide Bidirectional Case-Control Study.Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Subtyping Alzheimer's disease and Parkinson's disease using longitudinal electronic health records.Nature aging · 2026Article
- Memantine, acetylcholinesterase inhibitors, and quality-of-care outcomes among patients with cognitive impairment: an emulated trial design.Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Detection bias occurs when an exposure is associated with a systematic difference in outcome ascertainment or diagnosis. For dementia research, diagnosed health conditions that bring patients into frequent interaction with health care may increase the chance that an individual receives a dementia diagnosis. Objective: To evaluate potential detection bias or misdiagnosis bias in evaluation of clinical factors associated with dementia using electronic health record (EHR) data. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study used data from 2 population-based volunteer cohorts: UK Biobank (UKB) and All of Us (AOU). Participants were aged 55 years or older, were dementia-free at baseline, and had linked EHRs. Participants in UKB were followed up from baseline (2006-2010) until December 2022, and in AOU, from baseline (2017-2022) until July 2022. Data were analyzed from November 2023 through February 2025. Exposures: Diagnoses of type 2 diabetes, depression, hypertension, urinary tract infection, kidney stones, forearm fracture, and gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. Main Outcomes and Measures: Rate of incident all-cause dementia diagnosis from EHRs and associations between clinical exposures and incident dementia diagnosis, assessed using Cox proportional hazards regression models. Results: Among 228 392 participants from UKB (n = 137 374; mean [SD] age at baseline, 62.5 [4.1] years; 53.8% female) and AOU (n = 91 018; mean [SD] age at baseline, 66.9 [7.8] years; 57.1% female), those with a history of a clinical exposure at baseline had higher dementia incidence rates compared with those without such history. For example, among participants with a history of GI bleeding, the dementia incidence rates were 3.0 (UKB) and 7.7 (AOU) per 1000 person-years compared with 2.2 (UKB) and 2.4 (AOU) per 1000 person-years among those without a history of GI bleeding. All exposures were significantly associated with incident dementia, with hazard ratios (HRs) ranging from 1.18 (95% CI, 1.00-1.40) to 3.51 (95% CI, 3.08-4.01). Risk of incident dementia was typically highest in the first year following exposure diagnosis and attenuated thereafter. For example, in the first year after GI bleeding, there were larger elevations in risk of incident dementia (HR, 2.17 [95% CI, 1.46-3.22] in UKB; HR, 2.56 [95% CI, 1.62-4.04] in AOU) compared with 1 to 5 years after bleeding (HR, 1.46 [95% CI, 1.15-1.86] in UKB; HR, 2.14 [95% CI, 1.63-2.81] in AOU). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of 2 large datasets, diagnoses of several conditions associated with varying risks of dementia were associated with a higher short-term likelihood of dementia diagnosis. This finding suggests that diagnostic bias or misdiagnoses may lead to spurious associations between conditions requiring clinical care and subsequent dementia diagnoses.
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.