A cross-country analysis of episodic memory and (potentially) modifiable risk factors of dementia

David Knapp, Arie Kapteyn, Alessandro Giambrone, Tabasa Ozawa
{"title":"A cross-country analysis of episodic memory and (potentially) modifiable risk factors of dementia","authors":"David Knapp, Arie Kapteyn, Alessandro Giambrone, Tabasa Ozawa","doi":"10.1101/2024.02.09.24302563","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The widely cited Lancet Commission concluded that 40% of dementia cases may be preventable through interventions targeting what they refer to as modifiable risk factors. These risk factors have been widely studied individually, but rarely investigated collectively and across many countries. If these factors are “true” (i.e., impactful) modifiable risk factors, then their independent relationship should be robust across countries and comorbidities. We analyze the cross-country consistency of relationships between these modifiable risk factors and episodic memory, a common predictor of cognition and dementia. Using internationally comparable aging studies in 31 countries including the United States, England and Europe, we estimate regressions of combined immediate and delayed word recall with modifiable risk factors and demographic characteristics. Cross-country differences in culture, policies, economy, and other collective experiences lead to significant variation in lifecycle outcomes, including cognitive decline and modifiable risk factors. Our approach does not conclusively affirm a causal relationship but can identify relationships that are weak or nonexistent. We find a limited number of robust relations: education, depression, and hearing loss show clear, consistent associations with our cognition measure. The evidence for other factors, including obesity, smoking, diabetes, and hypertension is weaker and becomes almost non-existent when correcting for multiple hypotheses testing. The inconsistent relationships across countries between episodic memory and obesity, smoking, diabetes, and hypertension suggest the lack of a causal mechanism leading to cognitive decline – a necessary condition for these risk factors to be modifiable and effective targets for policy interventions aimed at controlling dementia prevalence and cost.","PeriodicalId":501072,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Health Economics","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Health Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.02.09.24302563","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The widely cited Lancet Commission concluded that 40% of dementia cases may be preventable through interventions targeting what they refer to as modifiable risk factors. These risk factors have been widely studied individually, but rarely investigated collectively and across many countries. If these factors are “true” (i.e., impactful) modifiable risk factors, then their independent relationship should be robust across countries and comorbidities. We analyze the cross-country consistency of relationships between these modifiable risk factors and episodic memory, a common predictor of cognition and dementia. Using internationally comparable aging studies in 31 countries including the United States, England and Europe, we estimate regressions of combined immediate and delayed word recall with modifiable risk factors and demographic characteristics. Cross-country differences in culture, policies, economy, and other collective experiences lead to significant variation in lifecycle outcomes, including cognitive decline and modifiable risk factors. Our approach does not conclusively affirm a causal relationship but can identify relationships that are weak or nonexistent. We find a limited number of robust relations: education, depression, and hearing loss show clear, consistent associations with our cognition measure. The evidence for other factors, including obesity, smoking, diabetes, and hypertension is weaker and becomes almost non-existent when correcting for multiple hypotheses testing. The inconsistent relationships across countries between episodic memory and obesity, smoking, diabetes, and hypertension suggest the lack of a causal mechanism leading to cognitive decline – a necessary condition for these risk factors to be modifiable and effective targets for policy interventions aimed at controlling dementia prevalence and cost.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对历时记忆和痴呆症(潜在)可改变风险因素的跨国分析
被广泛引用的柳叶刀委员会得出结论,40% 的痴呆症病例可能是可以通过针对他们所说的可改变的风险因素进行干预来预防的。这些风险因素已被广泛地单独研究过,但却很少在许多国家进行集体调查。如果这些因素是 "真正的"(即有影响的)可改变的风险因素,那么它们之间的独立关系在不同国家和不同合并症之间应该是稳健的。我们分析了这些可改变的风险因素与外显记忆(认知和痴呆的常见预测因素)之间关系的跨国一致性。我们利用在美国、英国和欧洲等 31 个国家进行的具有国际可比性的老龄化研究,估算了综合即时和延迟单词记忆与可改变的风险因素和人口特征之间的回归关系。各国在文化、政策、经济和其他集体经历方面的差异导致了生命周期结果的显著不同,包括认知能力下降和可改变的风险因素。我们的研究方法并不能最终确认因果关系,但可以找出微弱或不存在的关系。我们发现了少数稳健的关系:教育、抑郁和听力损失与我们的认知测量结果显示出明确、一致的关联。其他因素(包括肥胖、吸烟、糖尿病和高血压)的相关性较弱,在进行多重假设检验校正后,几乎不存在相关性。在不同国家,外显记忆与肥胖、吸烟、糖尿病和高血压之间的关系并不一致,这表明缺乏导致认知能力下降的因果机制--而这正是这些风险因素成为可改变因素的必要条件,也是旨在控制痴呆症发病率和成本的政策干预措施的有效目标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Co-developing a comprehensive disease policy model with stakeholders: the case of malaria during pregnancy How does participation in coal-to-gas policy and availability of natural gas pipelines affect residents' well-being? Causally-informative analyses of the effect of job displacement on all-cause and specific-cause mortality from the 1990s Finnish recession until 2020: A population registry study Privacy Protection of Sexually Transmitted Infections Information from Chinese Electronic Medical Records Quantifying the health impact of crop breeding: Revisiting the Disability-Adjusted Life Years Approach
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1