ArticleAge and ageing2025
Development of a midlife-specific CogDrisk algorithm (CogDrisk-ML) to enable validated implementation of dementia risk assessment from midlife to late life.
Article in Age and ageing, 2025. 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.
- 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
- Glycemic status-dependent proteomic signatures of biological aging for health risk prediction.GeroScience · 2026Article
- Assessment of dementia risk scores in predicting mild cognitive impairment: A comparison of CogDrisk, CAIDE, LIBRA, and ANU-ADRI.The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundExisting dementia risk assessment tools, such as The Australian National University Alzheimer's Disease Risk Index (ANU-ADRI), LIfestyle for BRAin health (LIBRA) and Cognitive health and Dementia Risk Assessment (CogDrisk), show limited validation for middle-aged adults (age 40-64 years). The Cardiovascular Risk Factors, Aging, and Incidence of Dementia (CAIDE) tool, developed almost two decades ago, demonstrated moderate predictive accuracy. As key modifiable dementia risk factors emerge in midlife, there is a need for a new, more accurate midlife dementia risk assessment tool.
objectivesTo develop CogDrisk-ML, a midlife dementia risk assessment tool that can complement the existing CogDrisk tool for late-life dementia risk assessment. DESIGN AND SETTINGS: Data from the UK Biobank and the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study were used to develop and validate CogDrisk-ML, which was also externally validated using the Whitehall II cohort. PARTICIPANTS AND COVARIATES: Participants without dementia at baseline were included, with CogDrisk predictors along with additional midlife risk factors based on recent evidence.
main outcome measuresCox regression models estimated the relationship between risk factors and dementia for each sex. A random-effects meta-analysis model aggregated cohort- and sex-specific regression coefficients to develop CogDrisk-ML. Harrell's C statistics measured predictability, with multiple imputation used for missing data.
resultsCogDrisk-ML outperformed CAIDE in the UK Biobank and Whitehall II cohorts; however, it provided similar C statistics in the ARIC dataset. C statistics (95% confidence interval) for CogDrisk-ML were 0.71 (0.69, 0.74) for the ARIC, 0.75 (0.73, 0.77) for the UK Biobank and 0.70 (0.62, 0.79) for the Whitehall II study.
conclusionThe novel CogDrisk-ML for assessing dementia risk in midlife offers improved predictive accuracy. Combined with the CogDrisk tool for late life, it provides a comprehensive framework for dementia prevention throughout the life course.
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.