4.7 Article

Racial and ethnic differences in neuropsychiatric symptoms and progression to incident cognitive impairment among community-dwelling participants

Journal

ALZHEIMERS & DEMENTIA
Volume -, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/alz.12988

Keywords

Alzheimer's disease; cognitive impairment; ethnicity; neuropsychiatric symptoms; propensity score; race

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) are associated with the progression to cognitive impairment, and the risk varies among different ethnoracial groups. This study used data from the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center (NACC) to analyze the association between 12 NPS models and cognitive impairment progression. Results showed that the risk differed among different racial and ethnic groups.
IntroductionNeuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) are a risk factor for dementia; however, their prevalence and severity among ethnoracial groups are poorly understood. MethodsWe used data from the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center (NACC) (n = 6958; >= 50 years old). Cognitively normal participants at baseline, without any NPS or dementia diagnosis, had at least one follow-up. Survival analyses assessed the hazard ratio for 12 NPS models and progression to cognitive impairment. Propensity score weighting (PSW) matched participants on age, sex, education, and race/ethnicity. ResultsAll 12 NPS were significantly associated with progression to cognitive impairment. In the PSW models, compared to whites, Black/African Americans were more likely to progress to cognitive impairment across all 12 NPS models, followed by Hispanic, and then Asian participants. DiscussionPSW minimized selection bias to provide robust risk estimates. There is a higher risk of progressing to cognitive impairment for ethnoracial groups with NPS. Tailored screening of NPS and cognitive impairment should incorporate patient and caregiver reports.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available