ArticleFrontiers in aging neuroscience2026
Construction of a classification model for dementia among Brazilian adults aged 50 and over.
Article in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Dementia is a multifactorial and debilitating condition marked by cognitive decline and behavioral changes that compromise independence and daily activities. This condition is a growing challenge in Brazil, and early identification of associated factors can guide preventive strategies and health policies. Objectives: To build a dementia classification model for middle-aged and older adults Brazilians combining variable selection and multivariable analysis, using low-cost variables, including variables potentially modifiable and non-modifiable sociodemographic variables. Methods: Observational study employed a cross-sectional design and a classification modeling approach to estimate probable dementia and analyze the odds of dementia, using data from the Brazilian Longitudinal Study of Aging, involving 9,412 participants. Dementia was determined based on neuropsychological assessment and informant-based cognitive function. Analyses were performed with Random Forest (RF) and multivariable Logistic Regression (LR). Results: The prevalence of dementia was 9.6%. The highest odds of dementia were observed in illiterate individuals (Odds Ratio (OR) = 7.42; 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 4.04-13.62), individuals aged 90 years or older (OR = 11.00; 95% CI: 5.05-23.95), low weight (OR = 2.11; 95% CI: 1.12-3.97), low handgrip strength (OR = 2.50; 95% CI: 1.09-5.76), self-reported black skin color (OR = 1.47; 95% CI: 1.07-2.00), physical inactivity (OR = 1.61; 95% CI: 1.25-2.08), self-reported hearing loss (OR = 1.65; 95% CI: 1.16-2.37), and presence of depressive symptoms (OR = 1.72; 95% CI: 1.36-2.16). In contrast, higher education (OR = 0.44; 95% CI: 0.21-0.94), greater life satisfaction (OR = 0.72; 95% CI: 0.52-0.99), and being employed (OR = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.61-1.00) were protective factors. The RF model outperformed LR, achieving an area under the ROC curve of 0.776 (95% CI: 0.740-0.811), with sensitivity of 0.708, specificity of 0.702, precision of 0.201, Precision-Recall Area Under the Curve (PR-AUC) of 0.261 (95% CI: 0.217-0.319), F1-score of 0.311, G-means of 0.705, and accuracy of 0.703. Conclusion: The findings reinforce the multidimensional nature of dementia and the importance of accessible factors for supporting screening/triage and prioritization in primary care. Strengthening public policies focused on promoting brain health can contribute significantly to the efficient allocation of resources in primary care and dementia prevention in Brazil.
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.