BarcelonaBeta Dementia Prevention Research Clinic: a Study on Risk Factors Disclosure

Author(s):  
Author(s):  
K.J. Anstey ◽  
R. Peters

The evidence for specific risk factors for Alzheimer’s disease, vascular dementia and all cause dementia is increasing rapidly in quantity and quality. This has enabled the compilation of risk assessment tools for Alzheimer’s disease (1), and their validation (2). It has also supported the promulgation of public health messaging about dementia risk reduction or dementia prevention. In general these developments are strong advances in the field of dementia prevention. However, the oversimplification of the findings and possible over-or mis-interpretation of their meaning, poses risks to accurate and effective knowledge translation in this field. Lack of balance in the interpretation of evidence on risk factors for dementia may lead to trials of interventions for dementia prevention that are ineffective. This will waste resources and create pessimism about dementia prevention research. Two potential problems that may occur when translating evidence from observational research into prescriptions for prevention are identified here. The first is the generalisation of specific findings about risk factors either to multiple types of dementia or to multiple populations, when the evidence is in fact relevant to specific populations or outcomes. The second is the inference that reversal of a risk factor will lead to prevention, without knowledge of the threshold at which a factor becomes a ‘risk’, or evidence that reversal of the risk factor also reverses neuropathological processes instigated or caused by the risk factor.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth Stephen ◽  
Mariagnese Barbera ◽  
Ruth Peters ◽  
Nicole Ee ◽  
Lidan Zheng ◽  
...  

The first WHO guidelines for risk reduction of cognitive decline and dementia marked an important milestone in the field of dementia prevention. In this paper, we discuss the evidence reviewed as part of the guidelines development and present the main themes emerged from its synthesis, to inform future research and policies on dementia risk reduction. The role of intervention effect-size; the mismatch between observational and intervention-based evidence; the heterogeneity of evidence among intervention trials; the importance of intervention duration; the role of timing of exposure to a certain risk factor and interventions; the relationship between intervention intensity and response; the link between individual risk factors and specific dementia pathologies; and the need for tailored interventions emerged as the main themes. The interaction and clustering of individual risk factors, including genetics, was identified as the overarching theme. The evidence collected indicates that multidomain approaches targeting simultaneously multiple risk factors and tailored at both individual and population level, are likely to be most effective and feasible in dementia risk reduction. The current status of multidomain intervention trials aimed to cognitive impairment/dementia prevention was also briefly reviewed. Primary results were presented focusing on methodological differences and the potential of design harmonization for improving evidence quality. Since multidomain intervention trials address a condition with slow clinical manifestation—like dementia—in a relatively short time frame, the need for surrogate outcomes was also discussed, with a specific focus on the potential utility of dementia risk scores. Finally, we considered how multidomain intervention could be most effectively implemented in a public health context and the implications world-wide for other non-communicable diseases targeting common risk factors, taking into account the limited evidence in low-middle income countries. In conclusion, the evidence from the first WHO guidelines for risk reduction of cognitive decline and dementia indicated that “one size does not fit all,” and multidomain approaches adaptable to different populations and individuals are likely to be the most effective. Harmonization in trial design, the use of appropriate outcome measures, and sustainability in large at-risk populations in the context of other chronic disorders also emerged as key elements.


2021 ◽  
pp. injuryprev-2021-044322
Author(s):  
Avital Rachelle Wulz ◽  
Royal Law ◽  
Jing Wang ◽  
Amy Funk Wolkin

ObjectiveThe purpose of this research is to identify how data science is applied in suicide prevention literature, describe the current landscape of this literature and highlight areas where data science may be useful for future injury prevention research.DesignWe conducted a literature review of injury prevention and data science in April 2020 and January 2021 in three databases.MethodsFor the included 99 articles, we extracted the following: (1) author(s) and year; (2) title; (3) study approach (4) reason for applying data science method; (5) data science method type; (6) study description; (7) data source and (8) focus on a disproportionately affected population.ResultsResults showed the literature on data science and suicide more than doubled from 2019 to 2020, with articles with individual-level approaches more prevalent than population-level approaches. Most population-level articles applied data science methods to describe (n=10) outcomes, while most individual-level articles identified risk factors (n=27). Machine learning was the most common data science method applied in the studies (n=48). A wide array of data sources was used for suicide research, with most articles (n=45) using social media and web-based behaviour data. Eleven studies demonstrated the value of applying data science to suicide prevention literature for disproportionately affected groups.ConclusionData science techniques proved to be effective tools in describing suicidal thoughts or behaviour, identifying individual risk factors and predicting outcomes. Future research should focus on identifying how data science can be applied in other injury-related topics.


Author(s):  
C. Berr

From an epidemiological perspective, in order to increase the level of evidence, it is necessary to refer to data from longitudinal studies to validate the temporal relationship between exposure (e.g. the behavior or modifying factor) and the disease. Findings from such studies are useful for defining risk factors and laying the groundwork for proposing interventions for prevention. This step is crucial in order to define the periods (life-course approach) and groups at risk, which will then become the targets of interventions designed to modify behaviors or lifestyle. Specifying the underlying mechanisms of these risk factors is one of the objectives of etiological epidemiology which focuses on the origin of diseases but is not essential for a more pragmatic interventional approach. These questions are essential for dementia prevention and are discussed in this paper. Furthermore, timing interventions is a major problem even if we identify primary prevention pathways in dementia. Another important concern for epidemiologists is the need to make projections to estimate the number of dementia cases in the next decades considering different intervention scenarios. These models require adequate descriptive indicators of dementia, demography and mortality and precise estimations of the impact of potential interventions in terms of delaying disease onset for instance.


2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (S10) ◽  
Author(s):  
Karine Fauria ◽  
Carolina Minguillón ◽  
Marta Félez‐Sánchez ◽  
Sofia Menezes‐Cabral ◽  
Gonzalo Sánchez‐Benavides ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 78 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-12
Author(s):  
Kaarin J. Anstey ◽  
Ruth Peters ◽  
Lidan Zheng ◽  
Deborah E. Barnes ◽  
Carol Brayne ◽  
...  

In the past decade a large body of evidence has accumulated on risk factors for dementia, primarily from Europe and North America. Drawing on recent integrative reviews and a consensus workshop, the International Research Network on Dementia Prevention developed a consensus statement on priorities for future research. Significant gaps in geographical location, representativeness, diversity, duration, mechanisms, and research on combinations of risk factors were identified. Future research to inform dementia risk reduction should fill gaps in the evidence base, take a life-course, multi-domain approach, and inform population health approaches that improve the brain-health of whole communities.


2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (6) ◽  
pp. 834 ◽  
Author(s):  
Esmé Eggink ◽  
Eric P. Moll van Charante ◽  
Willem A. van Gool ◽  
Edo Richard

The global number of people living with dementia is expected to increase to 130 million in 2050. Based on extensive evidence from observational studies, it is estimated that about 30% of dementia cases may be attributable to potentially modifiable risk factors. This suggests that interventions targeting these factors could perhaps delay or prevent the onset of dementia. Since the vast majority of people with dementia live in low- and middle-income countries, such interventions should preferably be easy and affordable to implement across a wide range of health care systems. However, to date, results from dementia prevention trials do not provide convincing evidence that treatment of these risk factors reduces the risk of dementia. The current paper aims to give an overview of available evidence for the potential for dementia prevention. In particular, we discuss methodological issues that might complicate the development of effective prevention interventions and explore the opportunities and challenges for future dementia prevention research. Currently, several ongoing and planned trials are testing the effect of multi-domain interventions on dementia risk in high-risk populations. It is desirable that future dementia strategies also target the wider population, through interventions on the individual, community, and population level, in order to constrain the growing prevalence of dementia worldwide.


Author(s):  
L.M. Bonner ◽  
A. Hanson ◽  
G. Robinson ◽  
E. Lowy ◽  
S. Craft

Dementia prevention is highly important. Improved control of vascular risk factors has the potential to decrease dementia risk, but may be difficult. Therefore, we developed and piloted a care management protocol for Veterans at risk for dementia. We enrolled 32 Veterans with diabetes and hypertension, at least one of which was poorly controlled, and cognitive impairment. Participants were randomly assigned to a 6-month care management intervention or to usual care. At enrollment, 6-months and 12-months, we assessed cognitive performance, mood, and diabetes and hypertension control. At follow-up, diastolic blood pressure was lower in intervention participants at 6 months (p=.041) and 12 months (p=.022); hemoglobin A1c, global mental status and mood did not differ between groups. Recall of a distractor list (p=.006) and logical memory long-delay recall (p=.036) were better at 6 months in the intervention group (p=.006). Care management may contribute to improved control of dementia risk factors.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document