4.4 Review

Dementia Prevention: Methodological Explanations for Inconsistent Results

期刊

EPIDEMIOLOGIC REVIEWS
卷 30, 期 1, 页码 35-66

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/epirev/mxn010

关键词

Alzheimer disease; bias (epidemiology); cognition disorders; dementia; epidemiologic research design; primary prevention; randomized controlled trials as topic; risk factors

资金

  1. CIFRE
  2. French National Association for Technical Research
  3. Beaufour Ipsen Pharma

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The prevention of neurodegenerative dementias, such as Alzheimer disease, is a growing public health concern, because of a lack of effective curative treatment options and a rising global prevalence. Various potential risk or preventive factors have been suggested by epidemiologic research, including modi. able lifestyle factors, such as social contacts, leisure activities, physical exercise, and diet, as well as some preventive pharmacologic strategies, such as hormone replacement therapy, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, and Ginkgo biloba. Some factors have been targeted by interventions tested in randomized controlled trials, but many of the results are in conflict with observational evidence. The aim of this paper is to review the epidemiologic data linking potential protective factors to dementia or cognitive decline and to discuss the methodological limitations that could explain conflicting results. A thorough review of the literature suggests that, even if there are consistent findings from large observational studies regarding preventive or risk factors for dementia, few randomized controlled trials have been designed specifically to prove the protective effects of interventions based on such factors on dementia incidence. Because of the multifactorial origin of dementia, it appears that multidomain interventions could be a suitable candidate for preventive interventions, but designing such trials remains very challenging for researchers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据