ArticleJAMA network open2025
Generational Differences in Age-Specific Dementia Prevalence Rates.
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.
- Two steps forward, one step back: cohort shifts in cognitive function trajectories in aging European populations.The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences · 2026Article
- Trends in Dementia Incidence, Prevalence, and Mortality among Older Hong Kong Chinese, 2005-2019: A Population-Based Study.Neuroepidemiology · 2026Article
- Interpretable machine learning for cognitive impairment assessment: integration of clinical and radiomic white matter hyperintensities features.Journal of translational medicine · 2026Article
- Impact of ethnicity and antihyperglycemic medications on dementia incidence in older adults with type 2 diabetes.Endocrine connections · 2026Article
- Trends in physical and mental health needs across generations in Australia.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
- Clinical and Medication Factors Associated with Cognitive Decline in Dementia: A Healthcare Database Study.Current Alzheimer research · 2026Article
- Secular trends in incidence, survival, and health status at diagnosis of dementia in Sweden, 2007-2022.Alzheimer's research & therapy · 2025Article
- Regional disparities of antidementia drug treatment in Germany: what can we learn for the new generation of Alzheimer's therapies.Alzheimer's research & therapy · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Dementia is a significant public health challenge, with its prevalence expected to increase as life expectancy continues to extend globally. Objective: To estimate generational differences in age-specific dementia prevalence across the US, Europe, and England. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used data from 1994 to 2021 from the United States Health and Retirement Study (HRS), from 2004 to 2020 from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE), and from 2002 to 2019 from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA). Statistical analysis was performed from May 2023 to February 2025. Main Outcomes and Measures: First, 2 different methods-the validated algorithm and machine learning techniques as the robustness check-were used to identify respondents with probable dementia. Then the status of dementia was used to estimate the association of cohort with dementia status by age-period-cohort methodology. Results: Of the 99 420 individuals (mean [SD] age, 79.1 [6.2] years; 59.2% women) in the HRS dataset, 21 069 (21.2%) were included in this study; of the 83 580 individuals (mean [SD] age, 78.6 [5.9] years; 54.7% women) in the SHARE dataset, 32 490 (38.9%) were included in this study; and of the 31 384 individuals (mean [SD] age, 77.9 [5.6] years; 55.8% women) in the ELSA dataset, 8878 (28.3%) were included in this study. Focusing on people aged 71 years or older and controlling for age and period effects, birth cohorts born more recently were less likely to develop dementia in all 3 regions, albeit at different rates (point estimate for 1944-1948 vs 1919-1923 cohorts: US, -0.55 [95% CI, -0.77 to -0.34] vs -0.18 [95% CI, -0.25 to -0.10]; Europe, -1.49 [95% CI, -1.72 to -1.27] vs -0.24 [95% CI, -0.35 to -0.13]; and England, -0.48 [95% CI, -0.89 to -0.08] vs -0.23 [95% CI, -0.38 to -0.07]). This decreasing trend was more pronounced among women than men (point estimate in 1944-1948 for women vs men: US, -0.55 [95% CI, -0.86 to -0.30] vs -0.48 [95% CI, -0.84 to -0.13]; Europe, -1.50 [95% CI, -1.80 to -1.21] vs -1.34 [95% CI, -1.70 to -0.99]; and England, -0.76 [95% CI, -1.30 to -0.23] vs -0.07 [95% CI, -0.69 to 0.54]); the point estimates for men in England were not statistically significant. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study examining generational differences in age-specific dementia prevalence across the US, Europe, and England, we found that individuals from more recent birth cohorts had lower proportions of people with dementia. Work of this kind is relevant to plan for health and long-term care policy and workforce requirements across these regions now and into the future.
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.