ArticleSystematic reviews2026
Causal inference in real-world dementia research: a systematic review protocol.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDementia presents complex challenges for causal inference due to its multifactorial aetiology and slow, heterogeneous progression. Randomized controlled trials are often limited in their potential to fully address these challenges because of ethical and practical constraints. As the field evolves, observational studies incorporating advanced causal inference methods are increasingly used to estimate real-world effects in dementia research. However, the implementation of these methods varies widely and has not been systematically evaluated, with an emerging trend towards integration with techniques such as machine learning. This systematic review will critically examine how causal inference techniques are applied in dementia research, assess their methodological rigor, and identify trends, assumptions, and gaps that may inform future applications and methodological innovation in the field.
methodsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, searches will be conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library for studies published between 1960 and 2024. Eligible studies will include observational designs that use causal inference methods to investigate outcomes such as cognitive decline, disease progression, and quality of life. Data extraction will capture study characteristics, methodological details, and key findings, with risk of bias assessed using ROBINS-I. A narrative synthesis will summarize qualitative results, and meta-analyses will be performed when methodological homogeneity permits. DISCUSSION: This review will address a critical gap in the evaluation of the application of causal inference methods in real-world dementia research. By identifying methodological challenges, underlying assumptions, and emerging analytical techniques, it aims to strengthen research rigor and reproducibility and inform future methodological development, with potential implications for policy and practice in dementia care. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42024619228).
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.